The myth of "peaceful" Finland. What prompted the USSR to start a war with Finland

133
The myth of "peaceful" Finland. What prompted the USSR to start a war with Finland

75 years ago, 30 November 1939, the Winter War began (Soviet-Finnish war). The winter war for a long time was almost unknown to the inhabitants of Russia. In 1980-1990's, when it was possible to blaspheme with impunity history Russia-USSR was dominated by the point of view that the “bloody Stalin” wanted to capture “innocent” Finland, but a small, but proud northern people fought back the northern “evil empire”. Thus, Stalin was blamed not only for the Soviet-Finnish 1939-1940 war, but also for the fact that Finland was “forced” to ally with Hitler’s Germany to resist the “aggression” of the Soviet Union.

Many books and articles denounced Soviet Mordor, who attacked little Finland. They called absolutely fantastic numbers of Soviet losses, reported on heroic Finnish submachine gunners and snipers, the stupidity of Soviet generals and much more. Any reasonable reasons for the Kremlin’s actions were completely denied. They say the irrational malice of the “bloody dictator” is to blame for everything.

In order to understand why Moscow went to this war, it is necessary to recall the history of Finland. Finnish tribes have long been on the periphery of the Russian state and the Swedish kingdom. Some of them became part of Russia, became "Russian". The fragmentation and weakening of Rus led to the fact that the Finnish tribes were conquered and subjugated by Sweden. The Swedes carried out a colonization policy in the traditions of the West. Finland did not have administrative or even cultural autonomy. The official language was Swedish, it was spoken by nobles and the entire educated segment of the population.

Russia, having taken Finland away from Sweden in the 1809 year, essentially gave Finns statehood, allowed them to create the main state institutions, to form a national economy. Finland got its own government, currency, and even an army as part of Russia. At the same time, the Finns did not pay general taxes and did not fight for Russia. Finnish language, while maintaining the status of the Swedish language, received the position of the state. The authorities of the Russian Empire practically did not interfere in the affairs of the Grand Duchy of Finland. The Russification policy in Finland was not carried out for a long time (some elements appeared only in the late period, but it was already late). The resettlement of Russians to Finland was virtually prohibited. Moreover, the Russians living in the Grand Duchy were in an unequal position in relation to local residents. In addition, in 1811, the Vyborg gubernia was transferred to the Grand Duchy, which included the land that Russia defeated from Sweden in the XVIII century. Moreover, Vyborg was of great military-strategic importance in relation to the capital of the Russian Empire, St. Petersburg. Thus, the Finns in the Russian “prison of nations” lived better than the Russians themselves, who bore all the building up of the empire and its defense against numerous enemies.

The collapse of the Russian Empire gave Finland independence. Finland thanked Russia for first entering into an alliance with Kaiser Germany, and then with the Entente powers (more in a series of articles - How Russia created Finnish statehood; [/ url]Part of 2; Finland in alliance with the Kaiser Germany against Russia; Part of 2; Finland in alliance with the Entente against Russia. First Soviet-Finnish War; Part 2). On the eve of World War II, Finland held a hostile position towards Russia, leaning towards an alliance with the Third Reich.

The majority of Russian citizens associate Finland with a “small, cozy European country,” with peaceful and cultural residents. This was facilitated by a kind of "political correctness" in relation to Finland, which reigned in the late Soviet propaganda. Finland, after being defeated in the 1941-1944 war, got a good lesson and got the most out of its neighborhood with the great Soviet Union. Therefore, the USSR did not remember that the Finns attacked the USSR three times in 1918, 1921 and 1941. This was preferred to be forgotten for the sake of a good relationship.

Finland was not a peaceful neighbor of Soviet Russia. The separation of Finland from Russia was not peaceful. The civil war began between the white and red Finns. Belykh was supported by Germany. The Soviet government refrained from large-scale support for the Reds. Therefore, with the help of the Germans, the white Finns prevailed. The winners created a network of concentration camps, unleashed a white terror, during which tens of thousands of people died (only a few thousand people were killed on both sides during the hostilities). In addition to the Reds and their supporters, the Finns “cleaned out” the Russian community in Finland. Moreover, the majority of Russians in Finland, including refugees from Russia who fled from the Bolsheviks, did not support the Reds and Soviet power. Former officers of the tsarist army, their families, representatives of the bourgeoisie, intellectuals, numerous students, the entire Russian population indiscriminately, women, old people and children were exterminated. Significant material assets belonging to the Russians were confiscated.

The Finns were going to put the German king on the throne of Finland. However, the defeat of Germany in the war led to the fact that Finland became a republic. After that, Finland began to focus on the Entente powers. Finland was not satisfied with independence, the Finnish elite wanted more, claiming Russian Karelia, the Kola Peninsula, and the most radical leaders made plans to build "Great Finland" with the inclusion of Arkhangelsk and Russian lands as far as the Northern Urals, Ob and Yenisei (Urals and Western Siberia are considered the ancestral home of the Finno-Ugric language family).

The leadership of Finland, like Poland, was not satisfied with the existing borders, preparing for war. Poland had territorial claims to almost all its neighbors - Lithuania, the USSR, Czechoslovakia and Germany, the Polish gentry dreamed of restoring a great power “from sea to sea”. This is more or less known in Russia. But few people know that the Finnish elite raved about a similar idea, the creation of the “Great Finland”. The ruling elite also set out to create Great Finland. The Finns did not want to get involved with the Swedes, but laid claim to the Soviet lands, which were larger than Finland itself. The radicals had unlimited appetites, stretching all the way to the Urals and further to the Ob and the Yenisei.

And for the beginning they wanted to capture Karelia. Soviet Russia was torn apart by the Civil War, which the Finns wanted to take advantage of. So, in February, 1918, General K. Mannerheim declared that "he would not sheathe his sword until East Karelia was freed from the Bolsheviks." Mannerheim planned to seize the Russian lands along the line of the White Sea - Lake Onega - the river Svir - Lake Ladoga, which was supposed to facilitate the defense of the new lands. The composition of Great Finland also planned to include the region of Pechenga (Petsamo) and the Kola Peninsula. They wanted to separate Petrograd from Soviet Russia and make it a “free city”, like Danzig. 15 May 1918 Finland declared war on Russia. Even before the official declaration of war, Finnish volunteer units began to conquer Eastern Karelia.

Soviet Russia was engaged in fighting on other fronts, so it did not have the strength to defeat its arrogant neighbor. However, the Finnish attack on Petrozavodsk and Olonets, the march on Petrograd through the Karelian Isthmus failed. And after the defeat of the white army of Yudenich, the Finns had to go to the world. From 10 to 14 in July 1920 in Tartu, peace negotiations took place. The Finns demanded to transfer Karelia to them, the Soviet side refused. In the summer, the Red Army dislodged the last Finnish troops from Karelian territory. The Finns kept only two parishes - Rebola and Porosozero. It made them more compliant. There was no hope for the help of the West, the Entente powers already realized that the intervention in Soviet Russia had failed. 14 October 1920 was signed by the Tartu Peace Treaty between the RSFSR and Finland. The Finns were able to get the Pechenga volost, the western part of the Rybachiy peninsula, and most of the Middle Peninsula and the islands to the west of the boundary line in the Barents Sea. Rebola and Porosozero were returned to Russia.

This did not satisfy Helsinki. From the construction plans of the "Great Finland" did not refuse, they were only postponed. In 1921, Finland again tried to solve the Karelian question by force. Finnish volunteer units, without declaring war, invaded Soviet territory, the Second Soviet-Finnish War began. In February, the Soviet forces completely liberated the territory of Karelia from invaders in 1922. In March, an agreement was signed on taking measures to ensure the inviolability of the Soviet-Finnish border.

But even after this failure, the Finns did not cool down. The situation on the Finnish border was constantly tense. Many, remembering the USSR, imagine the great mighty power that won the Third Reich, who took Berlin, sent the first man into space and made the whole Western world tremble. Like, how little Finland could threaten the huge northern “evil empire”. However, the USSR 1920-1930-gg. was a great power only in territory and its potential. The real policy of Moscow was super-cautious then. In fact, for quite a long time, Moscow, until it got stronger, pursued an extremely flexible policy, most often yielding, did not climb on the rampage.

For example, the Japanese for a long time robbed our waters near the Kamchatka Peninsula. Under the protection of their warships, Japanese fishermen not only cleaned out all the living creatures from our waters for millions of gold rubles, but also freely landed on our shores to repair, process fish, get fresh water, and so on. The USSR grew stronger thanks to successful industrialization, received a powerful military-industrial complex and strong armed forces, the red commanders had a strict order to restrain Japanese troops only on their territory, without crossing the border. The situation was similar in the Russian North, where Norwegian fishermen fished in the internal waters of the USSR. And when Soviet border guards tried to protest, Norway took out warships to the White Sea.

Of course, in Finland they no longer wanted to fight the USSR alone. Finland has become a friend of any hostile Russian powers. As the first Finnish Prime Minister Per Evind Swinhovud noted: “Any enemy of Russia must always be a friend of Finland.” Against this background, Finland has made friendship even with Japan. Japanese officers began to come to Finland for an internship. In Finland, as in Poland, they feared any strengthening of the USSR, since their leaders built their calculations that a war of some great Western power with Russia was inevitable (or a war between Japan and the USSR), and they would be able to profit at the expense of the Russian lands . Inside Finland, the press was constantly hostile to the USSR, led almost open propaganda for the attack on Russia and the rejection of its territories. On the Soviet-Finnish border all sorts of provocations constantly occurred on land, at sea and in the air.

After hopes of an imminent conflict between Japan and the USSR did not materialize, the Finnish leadership headed for a close alliance with Germany. The two countries had close military-technical cooperation. With the consent of Finland, a German intelligence and counterintelligence center (the “Bureau of Cellarius”) was created in the country. His main task was to conduct intelligence work against the USSR. The Germans were primarily interested in data on the Baltic navy, compounds of the Leningrad Military District and industry of the northwestern part of the USSR. By the beginning of 1939, Finland, with the help of German specialists, had built a network of military airfields, which was capable of receiving 10 times more aircraft than there were in the Finnish Air Force. Very indicative is the fact that even before the war of 1939-1940. An identification mark of the Finnish Air Force and armored forces was the Finnish swastika.

Thus, by the beginning of a big war in Europe, we had a clearly hostile, aggressive-minded state on the north-western frontier, whose elite dreamed of building “Great Finland at the expense of the Russian (Soviet) lands and was ready to be friends with any potential opponent of the USSR. Helsinki were ready to fight with the USSR both in alliance with Germany and Japan, and with the help of England and France.

The Soviet leadership understood everything perfectly and, seeing the approach of the new world war, sought to secure the north-western borders. Of particular importance was Leningrad - the second capital of the USSR, a powerful industrial, scientific and cultural center, as well as the main base of the Baltic Fleet. Finnish long-range artillery could bombard the city from its border, and ground troops reach Leningrad with one jerk. The fleet of a potential enemy (Germany or England and France) could easily break through to Kronstadt and then Leningrad. To protect the city, it was necessary to remove the land border on land, as well as to restore the distant line of defense at the entrance to the Gulf of Finland, getting a place under the fortifications on the northern and southern shores. The largest fleet of the Soviet Union - the Baltic, was actually blocked in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. The Baltic Fleet had a single base - Kronstadt. Kronstadt and the Soviet ships could have been hit by the long-range coastal defense weapons of Finland. This situation could not satisfy the Soviet leadership.

With Estonia, the issue could be resolved peacefully. In September, 1939 between the USSR and Estonia was signed an agreement on mutual assistance. The Soviet military contingent was introduced into the territory of Estonia. The USSR obtained the rights to create military bases on the islands of Ezel and Dago, in Paldiski and Haapsalu.

With Finland in an amicable agreement could not be reached. Although negotiations began back in 1938 year. Moscow has tried everything. She proposed to conclude an agreement on mutual assistance and together defend the zone of the Gulf of Finland, give the USSR the opportunity to create a base on the coast of Finland (the Hanko peninsula), and sell or lease out several islands in the Gulf of Finland. It was also proposed to move the border away from Leningrad. As compensation, the Soviet Union offered much larger areas of Eastern Karelia, concessional loans, economic benefits, etc. However, all proposals came up against the categorical refusal of the Finnish side. It is impossible not to mention the inflammatory role of London. The British told the Finns that it was necessary to take a firm stand and not to succumb to the pressure of Moscow. This encouraged Helsinki.

Finland has begun a general mobilization and evacuation of the civilian population from the border areas. At the same time, arrests of leftist leaders were carried out. At the border, frequent incidents. So, November 26 1939, a border incident occurred in the village of Mineila. According to Soviet data, Finnish artillery shelled Soviet territory. The Finnish side has declared the culprit provocation of the USSR. 28 November, the Soviet government announced the denunciation of the non-aggression pact with Finland. November 30 war began. Its results are known. Moscow solved the task of ensuring the security of Leningrad and the Baltic Fleet. It can be said that only thanks to the Winter War, the enemy was unable, during the Great Patriotic War, to capture the second capital of the Soviet Union.

Currently, Finland is again drifting towards the West, NATO, so you should watch it closely. The “cozy and cultural” country can once again recall the plans of the “Great Finland” up to the Northern Urals. Finland and Sweden are thinking about joining NATO, and the Baltic States and Poland are literally turning into NATO’s headboards for aggression against Russia. And Ukraine is becoming a tool for war with Russia in the south-western direction.
133 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +9
    1 December 2014 07: 31
    History cannot be changed, but the Finns can only be respected for having agreed with them after the war and to this day they have been cooperating with us and do not show obvious Russophobia, wise what you say.
    1. +12
      1 December 2014 08: 09
      Quote: Igor39
      History cannot be changed, but the Finns can only be respected for having agreed with them after the war and to this day they have been cooperating with us and do not show obvious Russophobia, wise what you say.

      laughing The Finns received economic benefits from the USSR after the war, the supply of raw materials at fixed prices, and their goods went back.
    2. +46
      1 December 2014 08: 25
      They did not agree with them, but won. And having seen all the power of the Soviet Union, the Finns considered it beneficial to cooperate and make friends for the benefit of both countries.
      1. +16
        1 December 2014 10: 27
        All the same, we agreed with the Finns! Stalin
        invited the Finns to free the country themselves
        from Nazi troops. The result in 1944
        the year the Lapland war took place, according to the results
        which the Finns knocked out the Nazis with their
        territory! From here went the post-war
        good relations between the USSR and Finland!
        1. +2
          1 December 2014 11: 25
          This is the official version, the truth is that above ..... in the article.
          1. +1
            1 December 2014 20: 51
            The article is about other events.
        2. 0
          2 December 2014 10: 09
          As if they had a choice ...
          although he was: to be buried in the trenches or to accept the offer. As always, the mutts quickly run over to the side of the strong.
    3. +2
      1 December 2014 18: 47
      This is not wisdom, here are political parallels: when leaving the territory of Finland, the Germans burned 23 residential buildings, 000 churches, schools and public buildings, 126 of 600 large bridges. This is all in the territory on which hostilities did not take place.
      1. +1
        2 December 2014 02: 30
        Quote: shasherin_pavel
        This is all in the territory on which hostilities did not take place.

        Actually, the Finns call the withdrawal of German troops the Lapland War.
        There was a tank battle Finns in the captured KV against the Germans in the captured B1.Finns won))
    4. Vatnik2
      -9
      1 December 2014 21: 03
      Tear stories will begin that the "fascist junta" of Ukraine was planning to attack a small and defenseless Russia, but she did not want it to happen by accident, and further in the text Kiselyov-Lavrov.
    5. 0
      1 December 2014 22: 41
      Quote: Igor39
      History cannot be changed, but the Finns can only be respected for having agreed with them after the war and to this day they have been cooperating with us and do not show obvious Russophobia, wise what you say.

      That's EXACTLY! And in between, they act in full accordance with the plans of the geyropa and the USA!
    6. Steel loli
      +1
      1 December 2014 23: 24
      History cannot be changed, but the Finns can only be respected for having agreed with them after the war and to this day they have been cooperating with us and no obvious Russophobiawise what you say.

      Do you know what the word "Rusya" means in Finnish? But Wikipedia knows)
      https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D1%8E%D1%81%D1%81%D1%8F
    7. 0
      4 December 2014 04: 26
      would be wise, would not join the sanctions against Russia.
    8. Lover
      +2
      4 December 2014 20: 13
      I would not call the Finns "wise" in this case; I had to visit them, and I was personally convinced that the Finns still hate us. The mere fact that they officially write our Vyborg as Vyypuri - the pre-war name - already says a lot.
    9. +1
      16 May 2015 09: 39
      Russophobia, as they say, they are a little smarter than Estonians, but they do not tolerate each other. Now they are taking children away from the Russians by the juvenile police. the same is happening in Sweden and Norway. Everyone is guided by external circumstances and their behavior. The Finns already support 600 children at home on the State subsidy. It is profitable for them. They receive 1000 euros per month for each child in the orphanage. Finns are bad people, especially men, drink, ramble and pick up children in case of divorce. Many are sent to the villages as slaves. Those are still "good" neighbors.
      And here's what Human Rights Defender in Finland says: Johan Beckmann. Juvenile justice.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NCPLLIh_BDU
  2. +6
    1 December 2014 07: 49
    Ordinary jackals, which only together and rule !!!
  3. +14
    1 December 2014 07: 59
    An interesting article with many new unknown facts. It is a pity that Finland does not know about them or misinterprets them. This small country has the only way to survive - strong friendship with Russia. Unfortunately, the current leaders of Finland are stepping on an old rake forgetting about it.
  4. +7
    1 December 2014 08: 08
    The war with the Finns is a lesson ... But even now not everyone is talking ... The classic operation of the West to draw the USSR into the war ... They did what they wanted ... Then the USSR was the aggressor, exclusion from the League of Nations, if the Finns had held out a little longer , joint appeasement of the "aggressor" ... England, France, Germany ..
  5. +12
    1 December 2014 08: 38
    The main thing is not to complex not only in relation to Finland, but also to all other countries (Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Romania and others). After all, they all went to war in Russia as part of different coalitions - France, the Entente, Germany, But we not only forgave everyone, but also supported us in every possible way, hoping for reciprocity. Alas! During the years of the Second World War, only for the liberation of the Baltic states he laid 200 thousand lives of soldiers on the altar of Victory, Poland - 600 thousand, and what is the gratitude? Russia is not vindictive, but, in my opinion, one cannot flirt with anyone. Folk wisdom - friends are in trouble; You will not be forcibly sweet. Now is the time to look at everyone - who is worth what. Unfortunately, we love to enter the position of others, unfortunately, not infrequently to the detriment of Russia and our people. It should be more pragmatic.
    1. +1
      1 December 2014 23: 45
      Quote: oracul
      The main thing is not to complex not only in relation to Finland, but also to all other countries (Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Romania and others). After all, they all went to war in Russia as a part of different coalitions - France, the Entente, Germany ... It is painfully loved to enter the position of others, unfortunately, not infrequently to the detriment of Russia and its people. It should be more pragmatic.

      We should be tougher and more merciless towards those who allow themselves to offend Russia at the state level. The main Lithuanian whore not so long ago allowed herself to call Russia a "terrorist state". Well, let Lithuania sit on firewood and cow poop next winter. Not such an idiot will be elected president next time. And other "great" countries, like Chukhoniya, will ponder.
      Pragmatics in relations with former hysterical spouses is not effective. Only hard and cold power. Without mutilation, of course.
    2. -1
      2 December 2014 02: 15
      Quote: oracul
      and what is gratitude?

      Do these animals know such a word?

      Jackal, however, black-backed (Canis mesomelas)
  6. +3
    1 December 2014 08: 56
    In the days of "dry law" the Finns in St. Petersburg, having eaten, turned inside out - and their attitude towards Russia, the Union and the Russian pearl of them is as homosexual as ... Regardless of gender and age!
    Generally speaking, these Finno-Ugric peoples (Finns, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians and next to them ...) - for a long time, since the early Middle Ages, they have been striving for Europa (well, like Ukraine is now!). And what could they give her, geyrope - yes, nothing! naked and barefoot, the most chic achievement - the Lapps famously learned how to plunder (northern peoples - Chukchi, Nenets ...), robbed cleanly, the genocide of the early Middle Ages, which lasted to the present day ...
    Since then, everything there is so European - saturated with lies and hypocrisy ... a nation without honor ...
    What, for example, cannot be said (in spite of much and much ...) about the Scandinavians, or the Germans there ... More likely the Anglo-Saxon way of life ... and now, when he began to approach the "image of death", they began to try to reconsider! But it goes tight, without lubrication ...

    ... Maybe not so, I don't know, but I have this feeling from the Finns and Finland: from a "sensual rethinking of the experience of a long life" ... sort of like Tolstoy said? Leo seems ...
    1. +3
      1 December 2014 12: 48
      Quote: CONTROL
      But in fact, these Finno-Ugric peoples (Finns, Ests, Latvians and Lithuanians, and next to them ...)

      Well, go on: Karelians, Vepsians, Izhors, Sami, Mordovians, Mari, Udmurts, Komi-Zyryans, Komi-Permyaks, Khanty, Mansi. wink
      Quote: CONTROL
      famously learned to rob the Lapps (northern peoples - Chukchi, Nenets ...),

      Actually, Lapari is an old name for the Sami, that is, the same Finno-Ugric people. What directly themselves and robbed? At the same time, reaching the Cape Dezhnev. smile
  7. +3
    1 December 2014 09: 27
    Yes, in a coffin I saw all these Finland, the Baltic states and Europe, for me they are interesting just as much as they can be used for the interests of Russia. What will happen to them then does not interest me.
  8. -63
    1 December 2014 09: 39
    article is complete nonsense !!! Finland attacked, nurtured dreams .. what kind of nonsense ... even absurdity .. and who wrote such nonsense ?? is this man in his mind ??? negotiated did not agree .. so after that attack ... here the red councils behaved like cattle and aggressor definitely .. and by the way I admire the Finns !!! they let Yushka to such a mastodon, whom the crazy author here makes a kind of teddy bear funny and awkward trying to cajole the blood-aggressive government of Finland ... and how the councils waged a war is generally a shame .... you can even say that Hitler looked at how the Finns beat the Reds that the clay colossus .. and he was right by the way ... only God saved Russia .. but this is a separate issue ....
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +7
      1 December 2014 10: 07
      learn history, maladu chilavek.
    3. +11
      1 December 2014 11: 12
      A person’s template broke ... Ish how splashed ... :)
    4. Chaos_Marine
      +3
      1 December 2014 12: 02
      Blah blah blah. If, as you put it, the Finns "beat the reds" they would not go to peace with such a desire. And the losses of the Union are overestimated almost to the skies, only the Finnish data are taken into account. As then, so now. They fought quite well, only the blitzkrieg did not work out.
      1. 0
        1 December 2014 19: 05
        Quote: Chaos_Marine
        only finnish data

        But taking into account the Finnish defense and winter conditions, the losses should be at least 100 to 1. And at the same time, it is not a fact that another army would have won in such conditions.
        1. 0
          1 December 2014 20: 15
          Losses of about 1 to 10-12, plus a large number of injured and frostbite
    5. +4
      1 December 2014 13: 32
      Quote: Kazanok
      Finland attacked, nurtured dreams .. what kind of nonsense ... even absurdity .. and who wrote such nonsense ?? is this person out of his mind ??

      Officially, there were four Soviet-Finnish wars. Unofficially, there were more conflicts on the border, but by the 1925 year of the USSR, the conflicts had grown stronger and did not turn into wars.

      From wiki

      The First Soviet-Finnish War (1918 — 1920) —fighting between the White Finnish forces and the Red Army units in Soviet Russia from March 1918 to October 1920. At first, it was conducted unofficially. Since March 1918, during the Civil War in Finland, Belofin troops, pursuing the enemy (Finnish "Reds"), crossed the Russian-Finnish border and in some places went to East Karelia (see. North Karelian state). At the same time, the ongoing military operations were not always partisan (see the Olonets campaign, the Olonets government). Officially, the war with the Russian Federation was declared by the bourgeois-democratic government of Finland on May 15, 1918 [1] after the defeat of the Finnish Socialist Workers Republic. The first Soviet-Finnish war was part of the Civil War in Russia and foreign military intervention in northern Russia. October 14 ended on October 1920 with the signing of the Tartu Peace Treaty between the RSFSR and Finland.

      Second Soviet-Finnish War (1921 — 1922)
      began: November 6 1921 of the year by the invasion of Finnish volunteer formations in the RSFSR on the territory of Karelia. No war was declared.
      culminated in: 21 on March 1922 with the signing in Moscow of an Agreement between the governments of the RSFSR and Finland on taking measures to ensure the inviolability of the Soviet-Finnish border.

      Soviet-Finnish War (1939 — 1940)
      began: November 30 1939 of the year by the invasion of Soviet troops in Finland.
      culminated in: 13 of March 1940 of the year with the signing of the Moscow Peace Treaty between Finland and the USSR the day before.

      Soviet-Finnish War (1941 — 1944) - military operations between Finnish and Soviet troops in Karelia as part of the Great Patriotic War
    6. +11
      1 December 2014 13: 42
      Quote: Kazanok
      article is complete nonsense !!! Finland attacked, nurtured dreams .. what kind of nonsense ... even absurdity .. and who wrote such nonsense ?? is this man in his mind ??? negotiated did not agree .. so after that attack ...

      It is in the spirit of the time. Say, Britain was negotiating with Norway, and then it attacked. True, she was only one day late - and met the Germans who decided to do the same. The United States occupied the Danish territories without any hesitation. Britain walked with fire and sword over the possessions of neutral France-Vichy - first in Syria, and then in West Africa.
      I'm not talking about how Finland attacked the USSR during the Civil Period.
      Quote: Kazanok
      and by the way I admire the Finns !!! they let Yushka to such a mastodon, whom the crazy author here makes a kind of teddy bear funny and awkward trying to cajole the blood-aggressive government of Finland ...

      For what I love the patriots of Russia, Which We Lost - this is because in their indefatigable urge to kick the Bolsheviks, they are ready to support any bastard - even the one that killed the Russian people. You, my dear man, admire the people who, 20 years before, staged mass executions of Russians in Vyborg.
      I emphasize - not the Bolsheviks, but the Russians. For it is difficult to attribute to the Bolsheviks, say, members of the family of an Orthodox priest or an officer of the gendarme administration.
      1. -23
        1 December 2014 14: 21
        No Finns are my sidekick. And they fought notably. Such losses where it is seen. 3 million clashed with the 180th. And they kicked on the hill, so that the lesson was learned forever. I consider it a shame, but a shame. And read what were your plans. Fully occupy the Finns and make another red volost in the hut. Losses look at losses. Well, yes, the Reds could afford the luxury of using soldiers as meat. Definitely from a military point of view, the feat of the Finns who defended their independence is admirable and entered into the annals of military history !!!!
        1. +8
          1 December 2014 14: 45
          Would you like to learn a story or something ... If the dates are so hurt by the warriors, then in the north then they didn’t fight at all, just ran away and that’s all? hi
          In the spring, when there was talk of a ceasefire, Manerheim had barely enough troops to hold the occupied lines, there was no talk of any offensive, as if the dates were raving. Reserves were swept clean. Data on their losses dates have not yet been fully declassified, apparently there is something to hide. wink
          And the losses of the Red Army in Talvisota are systematically overstated, in one source as much as 2 million I just stumbled upon the dead wassat
          1. -24
            1 December 2014 14: 55
            The warrior is what we are talking about ... why grind water in a mortar at all .. everyone perfectly understands what was the Red Army and the USSR and what was Finland .... we were supposed to be a crowd on the border .. pour and drown the Finns just so much in urine Roughly speaking, we were ... instead, a mob, they rushed and scooped up .... well, the Reds always had it .. they a priori degenerate .... and our Great country was perverted and plunged into chaos for many years at the same time themselves at home .. I repeat ourselves they destroyed so much of the population that no one exterminated so much .. for that alone they burn the hell of the Jews !!!!!!!!!!!!
            1. +7
              1 December 2014 15: 02
              That's just the same, if "STEADED A CROWD" (s) - would have got the Germans (and possibly the Anglo French) near Moscow in the spring of 1940. Especially, so as not to provoke Europe with a large movement of troops to the border, the troops took only the Leningrad Military District, thereby reducing the war to a border incident. hi
        2. +8
          1 December 2014 14: 57
          Quote: Kazanok
          And they fought notably. Such losses where it is seen. 3 million clashed with the 180th.

          You look at the involved forces more closely. Initially, the operation generally went by the forces of one LVO. And only when Comrade Meretskov screwed up, the districts of the European part of the country were connected to the matter.

          As for the losses, then, unfortunately, the army, which has just begun to switch from a personnel-police-territorial system to universal conscription, is, alas, quite normal. Read about the Polish campaign - there the problems of the rapidly reforming Red Army stood up to their full height.
          Quote: Kazanok
          And read what the plans were. Fully occupy the Finns and make another red volost in the hut.

          And where can one look at these plans?
          And why were they not fulfilled in 1940, when no one would have prevented the USSR from Sovietizing the Finns?
          Quote: Kazanok
          Well, yes, the Reds could afford the luxury of using soldiers as meat.

          And also Britons and Yankees. Meat grinders "Anakim", Hurtgen forest and the Ardennes are no worse than the Finnish one.
          Quote: Kazanok
          Definitely from a military point of view, the feat of the Finns who defended their independence is admirable and entered into the annals of military history !!!!

          Yes, they did not defend anything. Just someone decided that he had already taken everything he wanted.
          And so ... the road to Helsinki in March 1940 was open. The Finns did not have reserves. On the other hand, the Red Army has finally learned how to fight. The infantry learned to interact with tanks and artillery, assault groups were organized that carried out hitherto impenetrable bunkers in a few hours, the KBF artillery pulled up, the LKZ began to drive to the front still raw, but almost unaffected HF ... in short, nothing continued to shine for the Finns .
          1. -9
            1 December 2014 15: 16
            Quote: Alexey RA
            You look at the involved forces more closely. Initially, the operation generally went by the forces of one LVO. And only when Comrade Meretskov screwed up, the districts of the European part of the country were connected to the matter.

            I agree...
            Quote: Alexey RA
            And why were they not fulfilled in 1940, when no one would have prevented the USSR from Sovietizing the Finns?

            I think England and France prevented ...

            Quote: Alexey RA
            And also Britons and Yankees. Meat grinders "Anakim", Hurtgen forest and the Ardennes are no worse than the Finnish one.

            I agree, but I only know about the Ardennes and I also heard about Paschendael and Somma .. I’ll find out the rest now ... but that was when that was .... why such losses between us and the allies have such a difference ... and more .. read my memoirs like Kurt Meyer or whatever .. in the Leibstandard he commanded intelligence and subsequently the "Hitler Youth" division .. he described the attack of our guys .. or rather a counterattack when ours were beaten off by Rostov ... this is something .. I immediately went to smoke and thought what the hell then such .. damn we or something .. or is it all red ... more likely, of course, the bacillus of communism ...
            Quote: Alexey RA
            Yes, they did not defend anything. Just someone decided that he had already taken everything he wanted.
            And so ... the road to Helsinki in March 1940 was open. The Finns did not have reserves. On the other hand, the Red Army has finally learned how to fight. The infantry learned to interact with tanks and artillery, assault groups were organized that carried out hitherto impenetrable bunkers in a few hours, the KBF artillery pulled up, the LKZ began to drive to the front still raw, but almost unaffected HF ... in short, nothing continued to shine for the Finns .

            defended and even like ... here they all say the war ended in Berlin .. so I answer the same .. defended and that's it .. and what was on the mind of a mustached usurper no one will ever know ...
            1. +10
              1 December 2014 15: 56
              Quote: Kazanok
              I think England and France prevented ...

              England and France interfered in 1940. Funny.
              In the summer of 1940, France is such a funny stub with its capital in Vichy, which even yesterday's allies beat it ("Catapult"). And England is a state that loves the best part of its army in Dunkirk and is feverishly preparing to meet a possible German landing.
              Nevertheless, no one advises the Finns.
              Quote: Kazanok
              why are such losses between us and the allies such a difference ...

              Because the USSR accounted for the bulk of ground battles with the Axis on the ATVD.
              Allies until 1944 on the land They fought on secondary theater of war, but at the same time carried sea and air. And there are fewer casualties, although the cost of technology and trained personnel, the loss of allies can be compared with ours. The same aircraft carrier is under construction for 3 years, another year is put into operation, it stands with all its contents like a pair of mechanized corps and requires well-trained personnel. And then some submarine sends 2-3 torpedoes to the bottom of it and part of the crew. So: in a couple of hours - minus 2 mechanized corps.
              And what a strategic drop the strategists had ... what Schweinfurt was worth.
              Quote: Kazanok
              I read memoirs like Kurt Meyer or whatever .. in the Leibstandard he commanded intelligence and subsequently the Hitler Youth division .. he described the attack of our guys .. or rather a counterattack when ours were beaten off by Rostov ... this is something .. I immediately went to smoke and thought that for such a shit .. damn we or something .. or is it all red ... most likely, of course, the bacillus of communism ...

              Ahem ... I’m embarrassed to ask, but under Shipka or in World War I too bacillus of communism was to blame? And among the French in 1940, and among the Germans in 1944 - is she also?
              The first year of the Second World War is typical of any clash between a trained and experienced combat army and an army that did not fight. What is in the USSR, what is in France, what is in the Philippines, what is near Singapore.
              1. +2
                1 December 2014 19: 58
                Quote: Alexey RA
                In the summer of 1940, France is such a ridiculous stub with its capital in Vichy
                Sorry friend, but this is summer, and the Finnish or Winter War is over
                on March 12, 1940. March 31 formation of the Karelian-Finnish Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic. In March, France was still in favor.
                Here is a quote from the eight-volume History of Russia. Volume 8, page 29. "Sweden sent a brigade of 11.5 thousand people to help the Finnish army. In England, a 100-thousandth expeditionary corps was formed."
                page 31.
                "On June 22, representatives of the French government ... signed the terms of surrender dictated by Germany."
                Sorry, but you're wrong here. "Plato is my friend but the truth is dearer"
                Everything else is completely with you.
                1. 0
                  2 December 2014 07: 46
                  so I wanted to write about the same thing ... it happened in the winter when the West was still in authority ....
                2. 0
                  2 December 2014 15: 09
                  Quote: shasherin_pavel
                  Sorry friend, but this is summer, and the Finnish or Winter War is over

                  So I ask - what prevented the IVS from finally advising Finland in summer 1940? When there was no hope either for France or for England.

                  And in winter, this pair of special hopes could already not be assigned. Czechoslovakia and Poland could tell a lot about how the Allies supported their allies and kept their promises.
            2. +6
              1 December 2014 19: 35
              There is such a book "Foreign Journalists about the Great Patriotic War" where articles from foreign newspapers are given, this is how an American journalist describes one of the streets of liberated winter Stalingrad: "I was told that battles lasted for three days on this street. I estimated at a glance the length of the street, the width and counted the number of Germans lying on ten square meters, it turned out about ten thousand. "
              This is how the German journalist Fölkischer Beobachter wrote after the war: “The Führer ordered to send five assault battalions to the Barricade plant. Never before had so many special forces been assembled in one sector of the front. Each battalion operated in one country: France, Denmark, in Poland, Yugoslavia and Greece. I had a special task to tell about the victory of German weapons ... Forty minutes of the battle on the territory of the "Barricades" factory had already passed and we saw a soldier running towards us. And we all decided that it was a messenger running to inform about victory, but another one appeared after him ... only ten soldiers returned from a forty-minute battle. There was nothing to report to the Fuehrer. The Barricades plant remained with the Russians. "
              1. +1
                2 December 2014 02: 37
                Quote: shasherin_pavel
                This is how the German journalist Völkischer Beobachter wrote after the war:

                This was not a journalist, but the commander of a sapper battalion. The book is called "Soldiers who were betrayed."
                1. -1
                  2 December 2014 07: 48
                  Helmut Weltz ..... read, read more at the institute ....
          2. 0
            1 December 2014 20: 21
            Well, they would have received another fifth column in full size!
        3. -7
          1 December 2014 17: 29
          Yes, it was a complete disgrace and a monstrous disgrace for the Red Army ...
          -The Red Army then already had combat experience, after the war on Halkin-Gol .., where all kinds of troops were used (tanks, aviation, artillery ...) ... -And what kind of "military experience" did Finland have ..? ...- And what kind of "kind of troops" did she have then ..? -And how did she manage to "kick in" the teeth of the Red Army ...
          -This is just horror ... -And what losses did the Red Army suffer ...
          -Yes, the Finns and soldiers didn’t have that much ... -how much did the Red Army lose those killed ...
          - But ... if then the Red Army would professionally and quickly smash the Finnish army to smithereens and ... - and in a week (or several days) would occupy Helsinki ... ... Hitler, seeing all this, would not have dared to attack the USSR ... -And if he attacked, then much later, the Red Army had time to re-equip with new types of weapons, etc. ... -And maybe Hitler did not ... -not would dare to attack the USSR ...
          1. +1
            1 December 2014 18: 23
            Quote: lonovila
            -The Red Army then already had combat experience, after the war on Halkin-Gol .. where all kinds of troops were used (tanks, aircraft, artillery ...) ...

            I am embarrassed to ask - which units from Khalkhin-Gol participated in the Special Forces Festival? In fact, all the participants of the X-D remained to strengthen the defense of the Far East.
            In addition, the results of X-D are greatly exaggerated in the memoirs. According to the reports of the NGO commission in 1939, the picture there was far from so rosy: most of the Japanese group went beyond the cordon while our tank wedges were advancing at a speed of 8-10 kilometers per day. But they decided not to spoil the victory - and the commission’s decision was sent to the archive.
            Quote: lonovila
            -And how did she manage to "kick in" the teeth of the Red Army ...

            Read the final speech by Stalin at the meeting on the Special Economic Front. It gives all the reasons why the war was going that way.
            Quote: lonovila
            - But ... if then the Red Army would professionally and quickly smash the Finnish army to smithereens and ... - and in a week (or several days) would occupy Helsinki ... ... Hitler, seeing all this, would not have dared to attack the USSR ...

            But then it would not be the USSR. Let me remind you that the educational program in the USSR completed its work only before the war. At the same time, in 1941 in the army elite - tank troops - 2/3 l / s had from 3 to 7 classes, and 10-15% - less than 3 or had no education at all.
            But what level of education the future commanders of the late 30s had at the beginning of their career:
            It seems that we still do not realize how low the level of general education of the Red Army commanders was in the 30s - not only after the repressions, but even earlier. For example, in 1929, 81,6 percent (and in infantry schools — 90,8 percent) of the army enrolled in military schools had only primary education or had none at all! In January 1932, 79,1 percent of cadets of military schools had primary education, in January 1936, 68,5 percent (but 85 percent in armored ones)

            And how to competently compete with all this? Commanders often do not know either materiel, tactics, or their own states. Diesel tanks were refueled with gasoline. The regiment's chief of staff at the check could not set the task for the battalion. The chief of staff of the corps could not answer - how much artillery was in his staff.
            Quote: lonovila
            -And if he attacked, then much later the Red Army also managed to rearm with new types of weapons, etc. ... -And maybe Hitler did ... -I wouldn’t dare attack the USSR ...

            And where would he go? The army is mobilized, an economic crisis is brewing in the country (French trophies have already eaten away) and famine. To cope with Britain, you need a fleet, the construction of which is long and for the construction of which you need to demobilize the army. But to do this is dangerous, since the position of the USSR is incomprehensible. Therefore, you must first eliminate the threat that can be eliminated by the current forces - and then switch to the fleet. Means what?
            That's right - to solve the British question, you need to defeat the USSR. This will partially return the mobilized to industry and agricultural, and in addition - the defeat of the USSR will deprive Britain of last hope on the continent.
            So the Germans thought. Why did they forget about the USA, which pumped up Britain with weapons and decided to enter the war before the end of 1942? And One knows them. smile
            1. -5
              1 December 2014 18: 47
              -Yes, you're right ... -On the Hal-Gol, against the Japanese, exclusively Finnish troops fought ... -and tanks, and aviation, and artillery, and infantry, and even ... cavalry ...
              -And all Finnish lumberjacks, tar and other residents of Suomi "went" there through real "combat experience" ...
              -And there were ... -dozens and tens ...- millions ... -That's the Finns and used this "huge advantage" and this "huge number" of tanks, combat aircraft and artillery pieces ... against a small and the feeble Red Army ...
              1. +2
                1 December 2014 19: 26
                Quote: lonovila
                -Yes, you're right ... -On the Hal-Gol, against the Japanese, exclusively Finnish troops fought ... -and tanks, and aviation, and artillery, and infantry, and even ... cavalry ...

                Funny.
                How many Red Army units in the LVO had real combat experience? Well - how many of them were at least at full exercises? Especially if you remember that until the mid-30s the personnel division in the LVO was one.
                What is the level of education of the Finnish officer corps and the commanders of the Red Army units participating in the battles?
                How many personnel divisions attacked Finland? It’s personnel - as the ex-territories have already left a bad impression on Khalkhin-Gol (the best terrdivisia of the district fled in the very first battle).

                In Finland, two armies clashed with no experience. But one of them - personnel-attributed - sat in a prepared defense on their own land. And the other - until recently, the former police-territorial, without completing another reform, tried to advance.
                1. +1
                  1 December 2014 20: 27
                  Well, the hell out of tsarist officers ???
                  1. 0
                    2 December 2014 15: 16
                    Quote: Starina_Hank
                    Well, the hell out of tsarist officers ???

                    But this is just the result of 1917. The new government did not want to get the same stab in the back.
                    Therefore, as soon as the workers and peasants commander cadres, faithful to the cause of Lenin-Stalin, went, so the tsarist officers with their three oaths began to be removed from the army. They left only those without whom it was completely impossible. Well, those in whose loyalty were 100% sure - the same Shaposhnikov, Ignatiev, Karbyshev, Galler.
                    1. Sugar Honeyovich
                      0
                      2 December 2014 16: 34
                      On June 21.06.1941, 450. in the Red Army there were 40 (minimum!) former officers of the pre-revolutionary army. The share among the generals is about 100%. They were XNUMX% sure of them? Where such confidence? Among them were former White Guards.
                      1. 0
                        2 December 2014 17: 50
                        I will tell you more - there was an Armenian nationalist among them. He rose to Marshal. smile
                        You better look at what proportion of the Empire's officers were in the Red Army at the end of the 20s. Compared to this, in 1941 there were a meager number of them. And that is only because it takes 20 years to raise a general in peacetime. This means that he will most likely have royal roots. Especially considering the fact that the revolutionary marshals and generals of the Civil were also cleaned up in the 30s with the same goal of "increasing controllability" - the new government did not want to get either the royalists, or Bonaparte, or appanage czars like Blucher.
                      2. Sugar Honeyovich
                        0
                        3 December 2014 15: 19
                        Of course. And not only Armenian. There were also Ukrainian and Baltic and other Caucasian. There were those who served first with Petlyura, then with the whites, and only after that chose the reds.

                        The share of officers R.I. in 1941, of course, it was higher than in the late 20s, if only due to a sharp increase in the army in the late 30s with mass releases of young commanders. The Germans had a similar picture with their policy of training non-commissioned officers in the Weimar era. The same picture is now in our army - with the exception of the generals, are there many Soviet officers left there? Too miserable.

                        The main thing is not this - if there were more tsarist officers in the Red Army in the Finnish war than there were, it would hardly have affected anything. At least those commanders-commanders from former colonels and staff captains recaptured no better than others.
          2. 0
            1 December 2014 20: 25
            This was a major failure of the Red Army, shame can not be called.
          3. +1
            2 December 2014 02: 12
            What a shame, if they won as a result?
            Is it a shame for my grandfather who participated in the Winter War?
            You say, don’t talk.
            In fact, the young Red Army, having no experience in waging war in winter, against a well, and most importantly, well-fortified fortification defense line, fought against the imperial army. That is, Russian versus Russian. Because Mannerheim was actually a prominent and competent Russian general, and not a Chukhonite lapotnik from a Finnish farm. And there were many of them. The Finnish war showed the crucial importance of a properly constructed defense in engineering terms. What about us? The cadets of our glorious Nikolaev Engineering School participated in the defense of the Winter Palace. Stalin remembered this, and so he dispersed him. And with her, he pushed the military engineering school. The best, by the way, in the world. In terms of armaments, the Red Army was certainly much stronger than the Finns. Therefore, no one expected to meet such resistance. They thought the war would end very quickly. And she went into the winter. For the winter, the Red Army was also not ready, unlike the Finns. Here are all these BUTs in total and delayed the victory. Realizing that it was necessary to fight not only with the Finns, but also to learn how to break into the lines of fortifications and engineering barriers, the Red Army attracted old military experts and began to study. To fight and learn how to overcome them. Have you seen at least one bunker line Mannerheim? I saw that they were very close to the training ground of our school. They were built in such a way that you look at them, and you don’t understand at all how they could be taken at all. But they took it, though at the cost of considerable losses.
            This is called not shame, but heroism.
            So learn more history and play less counter-strike.
            The story of how engineer troops revived in RRKA. The Finnish just showed what a huge role and importance they play. Which before her in the Red Army was practically nonexistent.
            But they appeared again just in Finnish. And then, in 1939, VITU was revived.
            1. 0
              2 December 2014 02: 41
              Quote: Revmirovich
              Stalin remembered this, and so he dispersed him. And with her, he pushed the military engineering school.

              Exactly. And he is also General Karbyshev. am
          4. 0
            2 December 2014 07: 50
            true truth ....
        4. 0
          1 December 2014 19: 19
          Quote: Kazanok
          Fully occupy the Finns and make another red volost in the hut.

          And what prevented it from doing so in the 44th year, when the Finns' full potential died, and the allies of Finland by the year 39 were forced, although they did not want to, to declare war on Finland in the year 43? What prevented the creation of Soviet Austria, did you forget the medal for the capture of Vienna? But couldn’t they have passed through part of Norway and created Soviet Norway in the north. It was the Allies who did not support Stalin's initiative to leave Germany to self-government. Because of them, Germany was divided, because the communist movement emerging from the concentration camps had a decisive advantage. It was the Allies who shot the peaceful demonstration of the French partisans for communist slogans in the liberated Paris.
        5. +2
          6 December 2014 21: 45
          Quote: Kazanok
          And read what the plans were. Fully occupy the Finns and make another red volost in the hut.

          Read less Suvorov and comrades, it has a bad effect on some fragile brains.
    7. +1
      1 December 2014 19: 00
      I cannot quote, but approximately this is what Adolf Hitler said after the signing of peace between the USSR and Finland: "Russia has done in a few months what any other country would have needed years."
      When he said "Colossus on feet of clay," Hitler primarily had in mind the multinationality of the Soviet Union, hoping that with the outbreak of hostilities, other peoples would want sovereignty and then the Union would collapse.
      When our specialists went to Germany to buy the latest models of military equipment, the German military reported to Hitler that "The Russians do not believe that we are showing them the latest models of equipment, they especially insist to show them the latest tanks." Then Hitler realized that it would not be possible to intimidate the Soviet Union with German technology. And he announced a new date for the attack on the Soviet Union, moving it from 42 to 41 in order to prevent the Union from arming with the latest technology.
    8. +2
      1 December 2014 20: 48
      You are absolutely right in your perception of reality. BUT!!! In such cases, the law comes into force, which states that "the one who is stronger and wiser is right, he is right." So, in any open dialogue in a melon, you would have received it for five kopecks, with all the tolerance to your opinion. And all because my dad is Russian and fought for HOMELAND. I don't care if my dad was right or not. I trust him without reasoning. Russia was and will be the bulwark of the Slavic world, and we stand on that. The author is recognized and respected.
    9. -1
      1 December 2014 23: 06
      Quote: Kazanok
      let the yushka to such a mastodon

      Yushka, in the sense of blood to our grandfathers, isn’t it? You’re talking nonsense, Litvin horseradish. Who cares who you admire, the question is, do they admire you? Yours among strangers, a stranger among your own. How did it tire me, all who are not too lazy to feel shy and bring their crap to us Russians about our grandfathers. We don’t have to justify ourselves to anyone if we had the strength on our side and there was no more dust. Our grandfathers are only to blame for the fact that they were excessively humanists , all these affected countries still had to smoke, and they were allowed to be reborn.
  9. +2
    1 December 2014 09: 42
    Keep on a short leash, and the friendship of peoples is a very loose concept and is currently not entirely clear, especially for the younger generation.
  10. +3
    1 December 2014 09: 48
    However, the Finnish attack on Petrozavodsk and Olonets, a campaign on Petrograd through the Karelian Isthmus failed.

    They simply weren't there. And they threw Yudenich, although they could have taken Petrograd with him.
  11. -13
    1 December 2014 10: 18
    Rubbish, rubbish ... Already with the "Finnish tribes" began ... Wow, what a terrible Finland it turns out to be ... Before writing such a heresy, it is useful to get acquainted with the composition of the armed forces and its weapons of "dangerous" Finland.
    PS: If Stalin did not want to take Finland, then why was Otto Kuusinen needed?
    1. +5
      1 December 2014 12: 36
      Quote: Nayhas
      then why was Otto Kuusinen needed?

      They didn’t want to capture Finland, if they wanted, in 1944-45 they would have taken the Finns ready without Kuusinen wink
      1. 0
        1 December 2014 17: 38
        Quote: Landwarrior
        They didn’t want to capture Finland, if they wanted, in 1944-45 they would have taken the Finns ready without Kuusinen

        This is not about 1944., Stalin was not up to Finland then, it was important to withdraw it from the war and free troops for more important tasks in Europe.
        In 1939. Having announced the recognition of the "government" of O. Kuusinen, Stalin clearly saw Finland as Soviet.
    2. +4
      1 December 2014 14: 00
      Quote: Nayhas
      Before writing such a heresy, it is useful to familiarize yourself with the composition of the armed forces and its armament of "dangerous" Finland.

      The problem is that no one considered the Finns one by one. Like any state of the "cordon sanitaire", Finland was viewed as the first echelon of the Entente forces, ready to join the battle at any moment. Agree that to have a hostile state protected by ideological opponents, theoretically capable at any moment of delivering an artillery strike at the main base of the Baltic Fleet and the second industrial center in the country (in which, for example, half of the tank factories of the USSR are located) is not a gut. How to apply? Yes, at least the same Obukhov 12 "/ 52, which we quietly worked as much as 45 km.
      So they decided to get rid of this problem as soon as the Red Army became a little stronger, and the Entente with the Limitrophs faced them themselves with the grown problem.

      By the way, in the mid-30s it was believed that the union of Poland, Romania and Finland was superior to the Red Army. And if Japan also joins, then everything will be very bad. At that time, there was 1 (one) personnel rifle division throughout the LWO.
      Quote: Nayhas
      PS: If Stalin did not want to take Finland, then why was Otto Kuusinen needed?

      As a lever of political pressure. As well as the very slowly forming "Finnish people's army".
      If the IVS wanted to seize Finland, then nothing would stop him from doing this in the summer of 1940. When some Finnish guarantors signed the surrender at Compiegne, while others came to their senses after Dunkirk.
    3. -6
      1 December 2014 14: 23
      absolutely true .... the puppet ok was already ready .. however, it looks very much like the color revolution that is going on now .. probably the Reds still came up with them ... and the infection of communism throughout the world was actively spreading like that ... along the way the answer is ...
      1. +2
        1 December 2014 21: 04
        Quote: Kazanok
        and the infection of communism around the world was actively distributed like that ... along the way now there is an answer ...


        Read the history of Marxism .... even from Western historians. At the same time, ask where the word "communism" came from. hi
      2. +3
        2 December 2014 15: 27
        Quote: Kazanok
        and the infection of communism throughout the world was actively distributed so ...

        Oh-ho-ho ... guess who the following was said about: "counterrevolutionary and anti-communist, leading a compromising policy with world imperialism and betraying the cause of world revolution"? Have you guessed? That's right - this is Lev Davydovich who wrote about Joseph Vissarionovich.

        Active the spread of communism just curtailed as the IVS took power. It was decided to build socialism in one country, including through cooperation with capitalists. Export ideas - yes. Exporting the revolution with bayonets? No. The maximum is hidden assistance to fellow ideologists, and even if civilian activity is already underway in the country.
        A typical example is Xinjiang. To calm the border, the USSR sent troops there, and was in that region an absolute military force. But at the same time, they did not impose Soviets, did not organize communist coups, but relied on a local proven management system and even on the White Guards. Even the ranks for our contingent had to enter the old, from the imperial times.
  12. +16
    1 December 2014 10: 24
    Quote: Kazanok
    Finland attacked, nurtured dreams .. what kind of nonsense ...

    Rave? And you don't think that the attack of 1918 and 1921 by Finland is little more than “hatching plans”.
    Quote: Kazanok
    and by the way I admire the Finns !!! let the yushka to such a mastodon

    Do you also admire the punitive battalions in Ukraine? After all, using your vocabulary, they also "let the yushka in" ... Don't you think that such a vocabulary is unacceptable for their compatriots?
    Quote: Kazanok
    but how the Soviets fought a war is generally a shame ....

    How the war was conducted is well judged by the results, but they are quite specific and clearly not in favor of the impoverished people in Finland.
    Quote: Kazanok
    one can even say that Hitler looked at how the Finns beat the Reds and realized that the colossus was clay ... and he was right, by the way ...

    Berlin 1945. The flag of the USSR over the Reichstag, the charred carcass of Hitler - well, there is no bazaar, of course Aloizovich was right in his "prophetic" assessments ... As a result of the difficult Second World War in all respects, Russia (represented by the USSR) once again defeated the Western coalition and received new territories.
    Quote: Kazanok
    only God saved Russia ..

    Well, Tom. Stalin studied at the seminary, so the saying "trust in God, but don't make a mistake yourself" probably knew. He knew and transferred the country to industrial rails.
    1. -8
      1 December 2014 14: 31
      Quote: DesToeR
      Do you also admire the punitive battalions in Ukraine? After all, using your vocabulary, they also "let the yushka in" ... Don't you think that such a vocabulary is unacceptable for their compatriots?

      what does the group of cannibals of Ukrainians destroying the defenseless population and soldiers and militias of the Finnish army? I do not understand...
      Quote: DesToeR
      How the war was conducted is well judged by the results, but they are quite specific and clearly not in favor of the impoverished people in Finland.

      before evaluating this, you need to look at what the original plans were ... and they were global ... they don’t rake in the whole Finnish territory a little .. well, yes, we always have this way for a long time ... how the operation wasn’t right away to seize territory and to bleed the enemy .. active defense of the type ... this is the usual verbal diarrhea of ​​crap red warlords ...
      Quote: DesToeR
      Berlin 1945. The flag of the USSR over the Reichstag, the charred carcass of Hitler - well, there is no bazaar, of course Aloizovich was right in his "prophetic" assessments ... As a result of the difficult Second World War in all respects, Russia (represented by the USSR) once again defeated the Western coalition and received new territories.

      what was the price ??? Yes, and the current .. anyway then they all pissed off .. first the red evil spoiled the Great Russian Empire .. and then the descendants of the cattle pissed away everything that remained ....
      Quote: DesToeR
      Well, Tom. Stalin studied at the seminary, so the saying "trust in God, but don't make a mistake yourself" probably knew. He knew and transferred the country to industrial rails.

      this is Satan and he burns in hell !!!!
      1. +2
        1 December 2014 18: 36
        Quote: Kazanok
        first, the red evil sprawled the Great Russian Empire .. and then the livestock descendants spilled all that was left ....

        Oh how! That is, Shulgin, Guchkov, Alekseev, Kerensky, Lviv - are these red?

        The empire fell in love with the empire. Which decided that she could manage it better than Nikki. The rag-king was, of course, still gouging - but these were able to block his record for dumbbellism in management. For six months after February, this elite with a howl threw themselves into the legs of the "Bolshevik cattle" (as they called it), begging to save them from Kornilov. belay
        Who ruined the army by Order No. 1? The Executive Committee of the Petrosoviet (2 Bolsheviks for 15 people, not one in the leadership), and this order was approved in the Provisional Government by darling Kerensky.
        Who made a bloody farce with the independence of Ukraine? An interim government made up of prominent citizens of the Empire.

        When the Bolsheviks, in company with the Socialist-Revolutionaries, came to take power, the elite who had fallen in love with the Empire controlled only the Winter Palace. And that’s not all.
      2. +1
        2 December 2014 02: 45
        Quote: Kazanok

        this is Satan and he burns in hell !!!!

        Rash laughing
  13. CRP
    CRP
    -2
    1 December 2014 10: 35
    Links to documents please. Not an article, but a "secret story".
  14. +7
    1 December 2014 10: 49
    Greater Finland from White to Baltic, Greater Poland from Mozh to Mozh!
    How many will be so great?
    1. +3
      1 December 2014 11: 18
      ... Rzeczpospolita ... The Grand Duchy of Lithuania ... the Kingdom of Sweden ... in the east - Khaganates of all kinds, Crimean there, even what ... great haMstva ... hordes, empires ... are they now? kidding? ...
      Isn’t it time to learn from history ... until it (history) has begun to punish negligent students (yes, all by the pope ... with a strap or a rod)!
    2. +1
      1 December 2014 12: 29
      Actually, it was planned "Great Finland" right up to the Urals laughing
    3. 0
      1 December 2014 20: 08
      And Georgia to the Urals! Ukraine to Astrakhan on the Volga.
  15. hoard
    +1
    1 December 2014 10: 50
    Article minus. For an obvious distortion of facts: "The USSR did not remember that the Finns attacked the USSR three times in 1918, 1921 and 1941." June 25, 1941 (3 days after the German attack!) The USSR declared war on Finland, and not vice versa. And this is a fact.
    1. +3
      1 December 2014 12: 32
      The Finns were asked three times whether they would fight or not, and three times they kept silent. The war with Germany has already begun, and German troops were in Finland ... Excuse me ... hi
      1. hoard
        0
        1 December 2014 13: 36
        "On the day of Germany's attack on the Soviet Union on June 22, 1941, the Finnish government declared Finland's neutrality. On the same day, the USSR Ambassador to Helsinki, Pavel Orlov, assured that the Soviet government respected Finland's neutrality. On June 24, Finland's neutral status was recognized by Germany, Britain and Sweden. And in the early morning of the next day, 18 Finnish cities and villages were subjected to massive bombardment by Soviet aviation. According to Soviet sources, 236 bombers and 224 fighters took part in the attack. than any diplomatic assessments showed what the attitude of the Soviet Union towards Finland is. This is a war, "- Prime Minister of Finland Jukko Rangel told parliamentarians. On the evening of June 25, the Finnish parliament recognized that Finland was at war with the Soviet Union." (c) http://www.hist.ru/finlan.html
        1. +4
          1 December 2014 14: 17
          Neutrality?!!!! belay Despite the fact that 4 German militias were stationed in Finland, and German planes from June 22 flew from Finnish airfields to bomb Soviet territory? !!! belay
        2. +6
          1 December 2014 14: 25
          And now let's recall how Finland maintained neutrality:

          15.06.41/15.6.1941/XNUMX - Finnish troops in northern Finland are subordinated to the Germans - the "Order of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of XNUMX/XNUMX/XNUMX on the subordination of the V AK to the command post of the Norwegian army headquarters located in Rovaniemi" was issued.
          18.06.41/XNUMX/XNUMX - open mobilization has begun in Finland.
          21.06.41 - the headquarters squadron K.Gr.806 is relocated to Finnish airfields.
          Major General Haglund, commander of the XNUMXth AK, ordered the AK to prepare for the fulfillment of the offensive tasks assigned to it by the General Staff.
          22.06.41 - the seizure of the Aland Islands, the internment of the personnel of the Soviet Consulate.
          Hitler said in a radio statement that Finns and Germans fight im Bunde - "side by side".
          Finnish submarines put minefields in the Soviet terrvody between Tallinn and Kronstadt.
          The MZ Kriegsmarine leaves the Finnish terrorist forces to set up the "Corbet" and "Apolda" barriers.
          At the Finnish airfields, German mines were massively refueling, with MH deployed at Kronstadt.
          22-25.06.41 - Finnish and backlash reconnaissance flights from Finnish territory to Peter and Tallinn are in progress. One of the scouts was shot down - the route from Finland is clearly visible on the map.
          The Finnish RDG was transferred to Soviet territory. The goal is the LBC gateways. The flight of aircraft fixed border guards.
          Finnish airfields are raiding Hanko.
          German TCAs from Finnish bases operate on Soviet communications in the Gulf of Finland and the Baltic.
          The services of the Red Army of the Red Army and the Red Army Naval Forces record the concentration of German aircraft at Finnish bases (most likely, this is the already mentioned 806 group + refueling mine directors).

          Source - Mauno Jokipii ...
          http://www.aroundspb.ru/finnish/waywar/4.php
          http://www.aroundspb.ru/finnish/waywar/5.php

          Oh yes, about Finnish neutrality:
          In Finland, even before the war, a decree was adopted on the country's neutrality (June 3, 1938, No. 226). In June 1941, in the conditions of the German-Soviet conflict, a resolution not applied.
        3. -5
          1 December 2014 14: 33
          Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!!!!
      2. The comment was deleted.
  16. +3
    1 December 2014 10: 56
    How many people, so many opinions. But as the saying goes: "The enemy, he is also an enemy in Africa." The systems were fighting! It's just a pity for people. Finland, Japan, England, Germany ... America, everyone always wanted to "squeeze" something from Russia now, from the USSR then. As it was said, "no one has succeeded, and will not succeed. We will not allow it." God bless you, Mother Russia!
  17. +10
    1 December 2014 11: 06
    Thanks to the author!
    Again, I want to ask a question to our history writers - WHY THE USA IS Proud of ALL THEIR WARS AND "CRUSHING VICTORIES" OVER GRENADA, YUGOSLAVIA, IRAQ AND LIBYA, IS Proud of EVEN FAILING THE VIETNAM WAR, AND WE PUSH ON THE HEAVY ??? Why isn’t that what the author wrote about in our textbooks? Today, the Finnish War is described to us as an aggression of evil communists against poor democratic Finns.
    In the Great Patriotic War, according to our Russian liberals, Ukrainian Svidomo and Belarusian svyadom, we were Hitler's allies, according to their version, we simply "showered the Germans with corpses", especially crap scum, they generally declare to us that the USSR lost the war, despite the fact that it reached Berlin ...
    And we didn't need an arms race, the liberals "forget" that the United States and Britain wanted to attack the USSR in 1940, 1945 and after. The West's plans to attack us are also kept silent, but now we are "strategic partners"
    USSR liberals blame the introduction of troops into Hungary in 1956, to Czechoslovakia in 1968, but they do not recall American war crimes in their spheres of influence. Talking about the Afghan war, we are not told that under the "Soviet occupation" the Afghans had schools, factories and hospitals, but under the Americans there is nothing of this, but the Americans are now "fighting terrorism" there, and we are not talking about the increased drug traffic in the CIS under the Americans say.
    It is sad that liberalistic lies are now popular among the people, especially among young people.
  18. +2
    1 December 2014 11: 12
    Very indicative is the fact that even before the start of the war of 1939-1940. an identification mark of the Finnish Air Force and armored forces was the Finnish swastika.

    The modern flags of the Finnish Air Force are still "decorated" with the Finnish swastika.
    1. +5
      1 December 2014 16: 19
      do not distort
      1. Demetry
        +1
        1 December 2014 16: 24
        Quote: Dimon-chik-79
        do not distort

        distort not bags tossing and turning smile
      2. +1
        1 December 2014 17: 40
        Quote: Dimon-chik-79
        do not distort


        You have presented the Finnish Air Force emblem, and the Thinker has a flag
    2. +1
      1 December 2014 20: 38
      How long has the swastika become Finnish? The swastika is also depicted on the notes of the interim government
      1. 0
        2 December 2014 02: 49
        It is necessary to write in Brussels, let the Finns be choked laughing
  19. +2
    1 December 2014 11: 26
    And, by the way, I like the books of Suvorov / Rezun, he writes talentedly, you can't take it away, and in my case, each of his books more likely arouses even greater sympathy for Stalin and the Red Army, so the result is more likely the opposite of what was expected. , I don't remember exactly which one, he writes about the Winter War and asks, what other army in the world can join the battle in such terrible weather conditions and win? Allies skidded from the advancing German children and invalids, and panic dispatches like "Save and Save ..." flew to Stalin, the French, too, for obvious reasons ... only to keep the defensive. And the Red Army fully fulfilled its task in much worse conditions. So I suggest all critics to pass by calmly and not to disgrace here you are already a disgrace to our Motherland.
    1. -5
      1 December 2014 14: 38
      I haven’t neighing like that for a long time .. I’ve already spoken about this topic 1000000 times and the result is that it doesn’t reach people ..
      Quote: Standard Oil
      their Ardennes disgrace, when the entire Allied army skidded from the advancing German children and invalids, and panic dispatches like "Save and save ... flew to Stalin ...

      laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing laughing
      yeah 6 ss invalids .... panic dispatches .... bugagaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ......
    2. 0
      1 December 2014 15: 31
      Quote: Standard Oil
      and asks, what other army in the world can join the battle in such terrible weather conditions and win? Yes, no, the American and British disappear immediately, their Ardennes disgrace, when the entire Allied army skidded from the advancing German children and invalids, and Stalin flew in panic messages like "Save and Save ..."

      Yes, yes ... but do not tell me - where then did the Germans from Ardennes go? And who made his way to Bastogne, and then slammed the neck of the Ardennes bag? Really ours?

      Oh yes, disabled people from 6 TA SS - it's just great. Why then did our last efforts stop these "invalids" near Balaton (our infantry ran away from them in general, judging by the reports of our own anti-tank officers)?
  20. -2
    1 December 2014 11: 29
    "The separation of Finland from Russia was not peaceful. A civil war began between the White and Red Finns. The Whites were supported by Germany. The Soviet government refrained from large-scale support for the Reds. Therefore, with the help of the Germans, the White Finns won up. The winners created a network of concentration camps, unleashed white terror, during which killed tens of thousands of people "Very similar to the current rotten position of Russia in relation to Ukraine, and the consequences are similar.
  21. koshh
    +2
    1 December 2014 11: 32
    Finns just have a little vodka. More cheap vodka for the Finns and they can be forgotten as a nation. And then they roll the lip to the Urals and Ob.
    1. 0
      3 December 2014 22: 45
      Quote: koshh
      Finns just have a little vodka. More cheap vodka for the Finns and they can be forgotten as a nation. And then they roll the lip to the Urals and Ob.

      It’s true that everything ingenious is simple. You would have liked our idea in our government (without any irony).
  22. +1
    1 December 2014 11: 38
    The Finns were preparing for war precisely against the USSR. Without possessing human resources they had to build a deeply echeloned defense. In which, at the first stage, the Red Army got bogged down, breaking through the defense everything immediately fell into place.
  23. +1
    1 December 2014 11: 47
    On March 2, 1940, Daladier announced his readiness to send 50 French soldiers and 000 bombers to Finland for the war against the USSR. The British government was not informed in advance of the statement by Daladier, but agreed to send 100 British bombers to Finland. A coordination meeting was scheduled for March 50, 12, but due to the end of the war the plans remained unfulfilled.
    1. 0
      2 December 2014 15: 35
      Quote: parusnik
      On March 2, 1940, Daladier announced his readiness to send 50 French soldiers and 000 bombers to Finland for the war against the USSR. The British government was not informed in advance of the statement by Daladier, but agreed to send 100 British bombers to Finland.

      Heh heh heh ... so the Allies and Poland at one time promised help.
      Well, son, did your custodians help you?

      I’m wondering how the Allies planned to deliver their group? Via Norway? Then the Germans used to start the Weserubung. Via Sweden? Oh yes, the Swedes just sleep and see how they can simultaneously quarrel with the USSR and the Reich. After all, the Reich simply wants to find on its flank the expeditionary corps of the Allies (especially the Air Force, which from Sweden and Finland to the rear of East Prussia and the Governor General is at hand).
  24. +4
    1 December 2014 12: 44
    The "winter war" ended for the USSR not with the worst result. Yes, the losses were great, but not fatal (it is a pity, of course, for each individual who died, but alas, the army was just learning how to fight, there is nothing you can do about it). The territories that were needed were annexed. Much was comprehended and rethought in military affairs ... Yes, by 1941 they managed to do a little, but if not for 39-40. - 41st would be even worse. hi
    1. -5
      1 December 2014 14: 42
      Quote: Landwarrior
      but alas, the army only learned to fight, there's nothing you can do about it

      so these stunned and in 41 and 42 and 43 and 44 and 45 (Koenigsberg) learned to fight .... our sheep bosses (not all) studied and studied all the time .. but nikher did not learn anything ... all they drive Nicholas into the army .. so she didn’t let the damned Germans go further than Riga and Baranovich ... and then there was evil on the Volga ... this is probably the most brilliant plan of the mustachioed .. to lure the unchristians on the Volga and ruin them .. awesome pupils .. ..
      1. +3
        1 December 2014 14: 54
        Quote: Kazanok
        awesome students ....


        And if you look a little wider? lol
        From March 40 to June of the 41st Red Army, it was armed with new types of small arms and tanks (finally with ballistic armor and one turret wink ), aircraft artillery shells ... The uniform, and then shook up thoroughly. Yes, not everyone managed to do everything, but what they managed to do is impressive hi
        1. 0
          1 December 2014 15: 36
          agree Warrior .. but all this was useless ... everyone probably knows what remains of all this grandeur by November 41st .. this statistic is very sad ...
          1. +1
            1 December 2014 15: 55
            Well, not entirely tragic, but somewhere around ... But who before the "winter" sat in a puddle to the fullest, so this is reconnaissance. in the 30s we got through agents an atlas of fortifications of the Enkel Line, which was being built in the 20s, and calmed down. As a result, the reconnaissance of the newest fortifications of late construction (the so-called "Manerheim Lines"), which were built before the Winter Palace, had already, as they say, in fact, and not always instrumentally. hi
            1. +1
              1 December 2014 16: 20
              Quote: Landwarrior
              But who before the "winter" sat in a puddle to the fullest, so this is intelligence. in the 30s we got through agents an atlas of fortifications of the Enkel Line, which was being built in the 20s, and calmed down. As a result, reconnaissance of the newest fortifications of late construction (the so-called "Mannerheim Lines"), which were built before the Winter Palace, had already, as they say, in fact, and not always instrumental

              Everyone was good there. If you remember, Meretskov at the Meeting on the results of the Socialist Economic Fund generally denied the presence of this album. request

              In general, after reading the transcript of this Conference, the personality of citizen Meretskov began to play with new colors for me. Oh, how he tried to cover up his own failures, running into the same Stern ...
      2. Sugar Honeyovich
        -2
        1 December 2014 15: 08
        "everyone is chasing Nicholas's army .. so they didn’t let the damned Germans go further than Riga and Baranovichi .." - of course they didn’t let them in, because the Germans didn’t even try to go further. But if they had gone, Nicholas and his generals would not have gone to the Volga - they would have let them go to the Yenisei
      3. +1
        1 December 2014 16: 16
        Quote: Kazanok
        so these stunned and in 41 and 42 and 43 and 44 and 45 (Koenigsberg) learned to fight ....

        But what does Koenig have to do with it? Just there was an exemplary operation to take a strongly reinforced festung by the forces and means available to the Red Army. The actions of navigational engineers in König are generally considered almost a standard for how to use assault groups and how to organize their interaction with other forces.
        This is not Przemysl, which you had to take the second time, and then a siege.
        Quote: Kazanok
        everybody drives Nikolai’s army .. so she didn’t let the damned Germans go further than Riga and Baranovich ...

        Against Nicholas, for a minute, a third of the Reich army acted. And against the USSR, through the efforts of the same England and France - 80% of the Wehrmacht.
        Why diligence? Because none other than the Britons and Franks with all their might avoided a joint struggle against the Reich. And even when it came down, they arranged initially failed negotiations with the USSR in 1939, about which they themselves said that "the purpose of these negotiations is to put pressure on Germany." The real intentions of the Allies in 1939 are evidenced by the fact that the head of the British delegation did not have the authority to sign the treaty. They just wanted to use us as a scarecrow for the Reich.
        As for the WWI, Nikki was just lucky that the inevitable collapse of the front in 1917 did not happen with him. Fighting the Germans, having a quarter of the steam locomotives of the needs of peacetime, is impossible. Industry and import suppliers already worked in warehouses in 1916 - the supply could not cope. By the way, these warehouses conquered the entire Civil, and even shot something up to the 50s.
        Quote: Kazanok
        this is probably the most ingenious plan of the mustachioed .. to lure the unchristians on the Volga and ruin them there .. awesome students ....

        Well, his predecessor’s plan was even more ingenious: to ruin his own state-owned industry before the war, 3 years to retreat, snapping with counterattacks, drive the country into debt, destroy transport, appoint future traitors of the Empire to all posts, take over command of the troops - and lose all blown away in front of three Duma talkers.
        1. 0
          2 December 2014 08: 18
          Quote: Alexey RA
          But what does Koenig have to do with it? Just there was an exemplary operation to take a strongly reinforced festung by the forces and means available to the Red Army. The actions of navigational engineers in König are generally considered almost a standard for how to use assault groups and how to organize their interaction with other forces.
          This is not Przemysl, which you had to take the second time, and then a siege.

          why then crap with Breslau ??
          1. +1
            2 December 2014 16: 07
            Quote: Kazanok
            why then crap with Breslau ??

            The goals were different. And the scale too.
            "Pitting" the Germans near Koenig and the capture of the city was originally the goal of the operation of the whole front - 3 BF.
            And Breslau was an intermediate boundary of the 1st UV - the main tasks of the front lay much to the west. Accordingly, the front surrounded the city, replaced the mechanized unit with the infantry of two armies - and went further.

            А army pair и front (even if there are only 2 armies in the front) - this is far from the same thing. It is no secret that by 1945 our infantry sank quite significantly in number - divisions of 5000 men became the norm. This was compensated by giving the infantry reinforcement units, primarily artillery (in 1945 it was often not clear who reinforced whom: the rifle regiment could be supported by an artillery division). So, the presence of front-line control meant significantly more means of reinforcement, including even the air army.

            So it turned out that there was a full-fledged assault near König, and blocking and slow compression of the ring by limited forces near Breslau. The situation was complicated by the fact that all the forces of the 1st UV at that time were first thrown at capturing and maintaining advantageous positions for a future attack on Berlin, and then at preparing for the Berlin operation. There was no strength to conduct a full-fledged assault on Breslau at 1 UF - the entire front sat on 1 reconstructed and cross-linked railway branch from the USSR. So they decided: take Berlin and surrender to Breslau.
      4. +2
        2 December 2014 02: 52
        Quote: Kazanok
        Our sheep bosses (not all) studied all the time studied and studied.

        Everyone imagines himself a strategist, seeing the battle from the side.
        Not for you to judge them for sure.
        1. 0
          2 December 2014 08: 19
          and why not ... are they untouchable?
  25. +3
    1 December 2014 13: 34
    A certain "KhaLkin-goal" appears in the article again. My trust in the authors of such blunders disappears instantly.
  26. 0
    1 December 2014 13: 35
    Around enemies?
  27. +4
    1 December 2014 13: 47
    Quote: Kazanok
    but how the Soviets fought a war is generally a shame

    Is this one grandmother told you? Do you know the real facts of history?
    What's the shame? As soon as they brought artillery and created an advantage of 10-15%, they broke into the defense, which was built for 20 years, and in 2 weeks they were near Helsinki. Bravo!!! Clearly in the Charter.

    I climbed the Marshes of the first line of Mannerheim, a black spot. Where there are no swamps, there are lakes and cliffs. Roads - a minimum, at least from the Russian side. There are good roads from Finnish along which artillery can be transported. A lot of dugouts, bunkers, artillery positions. So one must think that it was not the Russians who were preparing to attack.
    1. reluctant
      -3
      1 December 2014 14: 20
      you probably weren’t at the battlefields - there were so many ours that I saw one — he came into our tent at night — a healthy black shadow — touched my leg and burned it like fire — from a fire in the direction of the forest — there we had such a massacre mom don't cry
    2. reluctant
      0
      1 December 2014 14: 20
      you probably weren’t at the battlefields - there were so many ours that I saw one — he came into our tent at night — a healthy black shadow — touched my leg and burned it like fire — from a fire in the direction of the forest — there we had such a massacre mom don't cry
    3. -3
      1 December 2014 14: 48
      what ???????? but what if not a shame ... our type of bosses did not even think about what kind of damage they suffered in the international arena ... it must be so crap ... the country became an outcast on the world stage .. there were no benefits from this war .. what's the use of Hanko if he never came in handy .. what a Baltic fleet .. ooooooooooooo yeaaaaaaa ... more than naval, probably no one craped up .. so stretch the fleet and everything and nothing useful .. well, except for the marines which they threw where no hit ..... and the tragedy of the Tallinn passage ... I looked .. my God .. so here the losses are cleaner than in the terrible defeat at Tsushima .... so there our brothers died in battle and did not lower the St. Andrew's flag .. . and here, draping, sank more ships than there .. I think this is the most terrible defeat or, more precisely, the beating of the Russian fleet in its entire history .. these scum probably did not even know about the "Mercury" .... but about the Black Sea, do not even talk I want to .. there is generally an edge and darkness ... there is simply .. no better to forget this thing ... such a Dawn is our country .. no no ...
      1. +1
        1 December 2014 14: 58
        Quote: Kazanok
        what's the use of Hanko if he never came in handy ..

        CHEVOO? !!!!!!! belay (C) laughing
        And where do you think, in 1941, the Red Army Air Force Berlin bombed flying? With him darling! bully
        1. +6
          1 December 2014 16: 22
          Quote: Landwarrior
          And where do you think, in 1941, the Red Army Air Force Berlin bombed flying? With him darling!

          Ahem ... not from him, but from the Moonsund Archipelago. Kogul airfield, Saaremaa island.
          1. +1
            1 December 2014 18: 26
            Quote: Alexey RA
            from the Moonsund Archipelago. Kogul airfield, Saaremaa island.

            I admit my oversight hi Thank you for correcting.
      2. +1
        1 December 2014 17: 14
        Quote: Kazanok
        chevo ???????? but what if it’s not a shame ... our bosses probably didn’t even think about what kind of damage they suffered on the international stage ... ETOGES need to crap like that ... the country has become an outcast on the world stage ..

        I didn't. Both Yankees and limes traded with us. For example, at the beginning of 1941 on the ships of the RKKF there were quadruple ZPU "Vickers".
        Quote: Kazanok
        there were no benefits from this war ..

        That is, 2 months to prepare for a KaUR battle is not a benefit? Imagine that the Finns will strike not from the new border, but from Beloostrov and Sestroretsk. And the blow will have to the "skeletal" SD, typical for the USSR. For the full combat readiness of the UR of that time, it took at least a month (mobilization, deconservation, field fortifications. Clearing of sectors).
        Quote: Kazanok
        what a Baltic fleet .. oooooooooooo daaaaaaaa ... more than the navy probably no one crap .. so stretch the fleet and everything and nothing useful .. well, except for the marine corps that they threw anywhere .....

        Leningrad in the autumn of 1941 was held by artillery of the fleet. Look at the ship’s ammunition consumption - even in 1943 and 1944 it wasn’t.
        And the counter-battery struggle of 1941-1944 also fell on the shoulders of the KBF.
        Quote: Kazanok
        and the tragedy of the Tallinn crossing ... I looked .. My God .. so here the losses are cleaner than in the terrible defeat at Tsushima .... so there our brothers died in battle and didn’t lower the Andreevsky flag ... and then the ships drowned more draping than there ..

        And how many LC and RC did the KBF lose in the transition? The core of the light forces of the fleet and the core of the l / s of the Tallinn units reached St. Petersburg. And the losses ... then don't forget to curse the limes for Dynamo.
        Quote: Kazanok
        but I don’t even want to talk about the Black Sea .. there’s generally edge and gloom ... it’s just there ..

        The landing near Odessa. Evacuation of Odessa. The landing party in Feodosia. And 9 months of supplying the main base in the absence of normal repair and basing.
        In the summer of 1942, the Black Sea Fleet from such a life simply ended: the combat personnel was reduced to 1-2 KR and 3-5 EM.
        Quote: Kazanok
        such a shame our country .. no, no ....

        Oh-oh-oh ... and it was worse - in the same Crimean.
        1. 0
          2 December 2014 08: 26
          I wrote about the League of Nations about isolation of the nations ... that the ships smashed the enemy with their most powerful weapons, I read ... I agree ... but in the end about the fleet, if you look, it's just a shame to say it again .. everywhere ABSOLUTE superiority and everywhere they sat without sticking their nose out of the harbors .. they smoked the sky for nothing ... we were generally beaten on the Black Sea as they wanted .. having hooked boats and there are some sort of landing barges ... every exit is someone’s sea of ​​ours and loss of failure and in general it is not clear that ... what for that fleet was generally built?
          1. 0
            2 December 2014 16: 40
            Quote: Kazanok
            I wrote about the League of Nations about isolation ...

            And what, is this bunch of pique vests still worried someone then? There, Japan and Italy left the League of Nations and lived in peace - and how many resolutions the League adopted on them.
            Quote: Kazanok
            everywhere ABSOLUTE superiority and everywhere they sat without sticking their nose out of the harbors .. they smoked the sky for nothing ...

            Absolute superiority in what? In ships? So since WWI, the situation at sea has changed somewhat - the Air Force began to play a key role. And the naval air force, which was not numerous at the beginning of the war (hint: look not at the number of aircraft, but at the number of crews - there are about 1/2 of the number of vehicles), suffered heavy losses due to their use in the interests of the army. In addition, due to the abandonment of the critical points of the coast by the army, the fighters of the fleet were physically unable to cover the ships either in Tallinn or on the Sevastopol "road of life" - after all, the combat radius of the main I-16 at that time was only 150 km.
            Quote: Kazanok
            on the Black Sea we were generally beaten as we wanted .. having boarded up boat boats and there are some sort of landing barges ... every exit is someone’s sea of ​​ours and a loss of failure and it’s not clear what ...

            About 8 air corps, as I understand it, you decided not to mention. Well, that's right - you think, the best backlash pilots working equally well at sea and on land. Kronstadt pogrom of the end of September 1941 - 8 air corps. The rupture of communications with Sevastopol in 1942 - again 8 air corps.
            What could the 8th Air Corps do? Here is the breakthrough of the LD "Tashkent" from Sevastopol:
            In total, over three hours of continuous attacks on the leader, 96 (according to other sources, 86 or 94 aircraft) participated, dropping 300 bombs on the ship (according to other sources, 336 or 360).

            Quote: Kazanok
            what for that fleet was generally built

            Were it not for that fleet, the Germans would already be in the Caucasus in 1941. Because the distracting forces of the Germans, Odessa and Sevastopol were held precisely by the fleet.
            The problem is that the fleet is not only ships. The fleet is primarily a base. Without them, the fleet, especially the warring one, dies quickly. You don’t have to go far for examples: I already wrote how much the combat strength of the Black Sea Fleet was reduced by the summer of 1942. But there is only one reason - the main bases and factories are either left to the enemy, or are in the area of ​​his aircraft and even artillery. The main fleet base is blocked and fired.
            For such a development before the warWhen the fleet was being built, no one counted.
    4. 0
      1 December 2014 20: 47
      The conclusion is not correct, we would prepare to advance, tanks would buy
    5. The comment was deleted.
  28. reluctant
    0
    1 December 2014 14: 18
    And then I wondered, where did we get a monument at the entrance to Petrozavodsk-Here the defense line passed in 1919-But what was it about !!!
    1. +1
      1 December 2014 14: 22
      Are you talking about Sulag? There, interventionists from the side of Medgora were advancing, dates in those years were weird in the north (Ukhta (now Kalevalla))
  29. +1
    1 December 2014 15: 48
    Therefore, the Soviet Union did not recall that the Finns attacked the USSR three times in 1918, 1921 and 1941. They preferred to forget about it for the sake of good relations.


    And this ... policy continues to this day. Well, how over the decades it is impossible to understand that the policy of forgiveness, for the sake of momentary interests, is constantly ending a fiasco. Rake. Former "friends" once again make a heap of claims and demand satisfaction, moral and material, but we stand with downcast eyes and are afraid to answer something intelligible, mumble, or even just keep silent. And when we try to timidly object to something, nobody cares anymore, the train has left, excuses are not accepted. Poland, Finland, Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, etc. etc., the list is long enough! But for some reason they are never afraid to spoil relations, despite the fact that they are not the world's largest powers.
  30. +3
    1 December 2014 16: 34
    It is very important that we ourselves do not forget the history of our country and do not self-flagellate, as we were offered in the 90s, rewriting the history of the country in the bud, grafting ridiculous complexes to us and hanging a bunch of unfriendly labels. It can be argued that the Finns were not white fluffy sacrificial sheep not in the 39th and especially not in the 18th and 21st years when they wanted to take advantage of the difficult situation that Russia was in, as well as twenty years later at 41, they also did not want to miss their chance.
  31. -4
    1 December 2014 17: 49
    In the Soviet Union, people who UNDERSTAND the world’s device were at the helm, and the current doctrines of the world are laying Wreaths on the grave of Mannergem (the sworn enemy of the Russians).
    1. +1
      1 December 2014 20: 52
      The ruler was intelligent, we would like that!
  32. Yandi
    0
    1 December 2014 18: 16
    maybe it’s enough to oppose the whole world, Russians?
    1. +7
      1 December 2014 18: 51
      Quote: yandi
      maybe it’s enough to oppose the whole world, Russians?

      Yes, we would be glad.
      But, unfortunately, every time "peace-friendship-chewing gum" from our side ends with "ISIL-Russia-Ebola" from the West.

      ICH, every time we are stigmatized for the same thing that the West is proudly doing.
    2. -2
      1 December 2014 19: 14
      Mind does not understand Russia,
      No yardstick to measure:
      She has a special feature -
      You can only believe in Russia.

      You would have caught me in the battalion. I would have jerked around the clock.
    3. 0
      5 June 2017 12: 36
      Do not go to us, and you will not feel any “opposition”. It's that simple!
  33. +2
    1 December 2014 19: 00
    The article is good. But I remember (and I think correctly) once again the phrase from "Peculiarities of National Fishing": "Learn Russian. It will come in handy."
  34. 0
    1 December 2014 19: 41
    Quote: thinker
    Very indicative is the fact that even before the start of the war of 1939-1940. an identification mark of the Finnish Air Force and armored forces was the Finnish swastika.

    The modern flags of the Finnish Air Force are still "decorated" with the Finnish swastika.

    what nonsense. an eagle there instead of a swastika
  35. 0
    1 December 2014 19: 43
    Bullshit, not bullshit, really bullshit all the talk. In those years, the Russian state strengthened, and it was just time to tackle the return of imperial territories. The Kingdom of Poland has already been returned, and the Grand Duchy of Finland has come ...
  36. 0
    1 December 2014 20: 28
    In our district, a week ago, they published the memoirs of two brothers who were children during the Second World War. So, according to one of them, the Finns committed atrocities worse than the Germans in the occupied territories. But somehow I don’t remember that I came across information that the Finns fought in the territory of Bryansk region, maybe it’s true during the Soviet era they did not want to "set fire" one of the "bridges to the West"
    1. +1
      1 December 2014 23: 30
      Quote: svd-xnumx
      In our district, a week ago, they published the memoirs of two brothers who were children during the Second World War. So, according to one of them, the Finns committed atrocities worse than the Germans in the occupied territories. But somehow I don’t remember that I came across information that the Finns fought in the territory of Bryansk region, maybe it’s true during the Soviet era they did not want to "set fire" one of the "bridges to the West"

      Complete heresy The Finns south of the Leningrad region did not invade. Most likely, against the background of the "winter campaign", the Estonians were mistaken for the Finns.
      1. 0
        2 December 2014 16: 57
        Quote: non-primary
        Complete heresy The Finns south of the Leningrad region did not invade. Most likely, against the background of the "winter campaign", the Estonians were mistaken for the Finns.

        Or Hungarians. They also "loved" the Slavs very much.
  37. 0
    1 December 2014 20: 57
    The article is good and fairly accurate, would put a plus, but ...
    Thus, the Finns in the Russian “prison of nations” lived better than the Russians themselves, who bore all the building up of the empire and its defense against numerous enemies.

    it turns out that in tsarist Russia, the Russians did not always occupy the proper position. Oh, this manner of some "Russians" to feel offended everywhere and always.
  38. +1
    1 December 2014 21: 03
    With Estonia, the issue could be resolved peacefully. In September, 1939 between the USSR and Estonia was signed an agreement on mutual assistance. The Soviet military contingent was introduced into the territory of Estonia. The USSR obtained the rights to create military bases on the islands of Ezel and Dago, in Paldiski and Haapsalu.
    The Finns actually showed the only possible option for action against the Russian empire - to resist with all forces and possibilities.
    The Balts - ceded, submitted to superior strength and their fate was unenviable. When, as the Finns, despite the defeat, they showed that it was better to not mess with them again. Therefore, there was no Finnish SSR in the Soviet Union.
    1. 0
      2 December 2014 00: 05
      Was Karelian-Finnish hi True, Khrushchev demoted from the union to the autonomous, but there is a girl at the Friendship of Peoples fountain at VDNKh lol
  39. +2
    1 December 2014 21: 26
    My friend studied in Finland. Finns says decent people.
  40. +2
    1 December 2014 21: 31
    Quote: yandi
    maybe it’s enough to oppose the whole world, Russians?

    Oh! and pachimu tagda nata on the east side of the expander?
  41. 0
    1 December 2014 21: 52
    A cauldron or moron or provocateur !!!
  42. Demetry
    0
    1 December 2014 23: 38
    An echo of that war. Finnish submarine. She looks sad and sad now.
    But although they were small, they did a lot of business.

  43. 0
    2 December 2014 00: 07
    Yeah, restless neighbor ...
  44. bug
    +1
    2 December 2014 02: 57
    Article complete nonsense IMHO

    Quote: Kazanok

    I climbed the Marshes of the first line of Mannerheim, a black spot. Where there are no swamps, there are lakes and cliffs. Roads - a minimum, at least from the Russian side. There are good roads from Finnish along which artillery can be transported. A lot of dugouts, bunkers, artillery positions. So you have to think, not the Russians were preparing to attack

    Do you really think that good roads leading to the fortified area are needed for an offensive? But what about the supply of ammunition, reinforcements? Further, if you follow your logic, then the "Stalin line", "Maginot line", "Sickfried line", etc. etc. were built exclusively for the offensive. It's funny.

    Reply to Molotov's note: "... However, in order to avoid any ambiguity on this score, my government proposes that the border commissars of both sides on Karelian
    The isthmus was instructed to jointly investigate the incident in accordance with the Convention on Border Commissioners, concluded on September 24, 1928.
    ..."
    Molotov's answer: “... The Finnish government's denial of the fact of the outrageous shelling of Soviet troops by Finnish troops, which resulted in casualties, cannot be explained otherwise than by the desire to mislead public opinion and mock the victims of the shelling.
    ... the Finnish government has shown that it continues to remain in a hostile position against the USSR, does not intend to reckon with the requirements of the nonaggression pact ...
    ... The Soviet government considers itself compelled to declare that from now on it considers itself free from the obligations assumed by virtue of the non-aggression pact ... "
    Izvestia, No. 275 (7045) of November 29, 1939
    Well, Molotov really wanted the world.


    Quote: goose
    What's the shame? As soon as they brought artillery and created an advantage of 10-15%, they broke into the defense, which was built for 20 years, and in 2 weeks they were near Helsinki. Bravo!!! Clearly in the Charter.


    Well, let's say not 20 years. The "Enkel line" that existed before, which was taken as a basis, began to be built in 1920 and finished in 1924. Moreover, most of the built bunkers were filled with cobblestones (that is, "garbage, garbage"). In 1932, the construction of 6 more machine-gun pillboxes began. In 1936, a partial modernization of the bunkers of the Enkel line began. In 1937, the first million-strong bunker was built, seven such bunkers were built. Only million-strong pillboxes met the requirements of modern warfare, were built of high-quality concrete, had flank fire embrasures and powerful protection made of steel plates installed at an angle. On the Karelian Isthmus, the Finns were able to build only six artillery pillboxes. The rest were machine-gun and unable to withstand tanks.
    From the above, we see that the Finns did not build the "Maginot Line" and as Baron Manerheim said: "... its strength was the result of the staunchness and courage of our soldiers, and not as a result of the strength of the structures ..."
    So who interfered not "with checkers on the head", but in the mind from the very beginning to hack the defense? Who else but our top leadership of the army is to blame for the deaths of thousands of people? Why was Meretskov unable to organize the same assault as Tymoshenko? Why were there not enough ammunition, food and WINTER CLOTHING? Oh, how many of these why.

    And by the way, the Finnish artillery did not shell Leningrad, the Finnish aviation did not bomb Leningrad, and the Finnish army reached the borders of 1939 and stopped.
    1. +1
      2 December 2014 08: 12
      Quote: error
      And by the way, the Finnish artillery did not shell Leningrad, the Finnish aviation did not bomb Leningrad, and the Finnish army reached the borders of 1939 and stopped.


      Give up! The Finnish army occupied Petrozavodsk and Medvezhyegorsk, which Finland never belonged to. They would have pulled on further, but rested on KaUR- and soured, they did not have heavy artillery to crack the fortifications.
      And besides, the Finnish army took a very active part in the blockade of Leningrad, trying to close the second ring of the blockade. Fortunately, to close completely, the strength was not enough.
      In general, forget these tales about "the kind uncle Manerheim, who did not want to fight." am
    2. 0
      2 December 2014 17: 25
      Quote: error
      In 1936, a partial modernization of the Enkel line bunkers began. In 1937, the first DOT millionaire pillbox was built; seven such pillboxes were built. Only millionaire pillboxes met the requirements of modern warfare, were built from high-quality concrete, had embrasures of flank fire and powerful protection from steel plates installed at an angle.

      Ahem ... didn’t the old DOS of the frontal fire convert to flank and skew aiming?
      Quote: error
      On the Karelian Isthmus, the Finns were able to build only six artillery bunkers. The rest were machine gun and unable to withstand tanks.

      Chihiks ... and you look at KaUR - there are also ORPK for BRO 1-2 pieces.
      The tasks of TVET in SD were solved by filling. And, judging by the losses of our ttbr, it solved them well. 20 ttbr named after the QMS was almost zero in 3 days of the assault.
      Quote: error
      And by the way, the Finnish artillery did not shell Leningrad, the Finnish aviation did not bomb Leningrad, and the Finnish army reached the borders of 1939 and stopped.

      The border of Finland along the Svir? We obviously do not know anything about our history. laughing

      The Finns in 1941 tried for several days to cross the line of the old border near St. Petersburg. They even took the unfinished forward ORPK from Beloostrov. But ours still managed to reactivate the advanced KaUR BRO and give them a minimum fill. And the further advance of the Finns was stopped by the DOS machine-gun fire and the fire of the army and navy artillery. The Finns did not find those willing to storm the long-term defense (near the railway in Beloostrov it is a kilometer through the swamps under fire from "Maximov"), supported by the fire of guns with a caliber of up to 10 "- and to do this with the regular means of the infantry corps - there were no such willing Finns. stop-order in the St. Petersburg direction - and changed the direction of the main blow to the overflow.
  45. bug
    0
    2 December 2014 03: 09
    I apologize in the first post quote goose and not Kazanok


    Quote: goose
    As soon as they brought artillery and created an advantage of 10-15%, they broke into the defense,


    Whipped up from Wiki.

    According to Russian sources
    on November 30, 1939, regular troops (Finland):
    265 thousand people
    194 reinforced concrete bunkers and 805 wood-stone-earth firing points
    534 guns (excluding coastal batteries)
    Xnumx tank
    270 aircraft

    Red Army
    November 30, 1939:
    425 soldiers (the total number of the Red Army as of December 640, 1 - 1939 people)
    2876 guns and mortars
    2289 tanks
    2446 aircraft

    At the beginning of March 1940:
    760 578 soldiers

    So how much, how many percent? Only in manpower at the time of the outbreak of the war 58% with a tail.
    1. 0
      2 December 2014 08: 35
      The mistake is a big respect to you !!! tell the truth !!! the words of a true historian !!!!
  46. 0
    2 December 2014 07: 48
    -And how many shells and ammunition did the Finns have ..? -What did they shoot for ...?
    -And the Finns did not have anti-tank artillery at all ... -Because it was the Finns who began to use the "Molotov cocktail" against tanks ...
    -Yes, and what was the "resource" of the Finnish army, hastily recruited from lumberjacks, farmers, resin workers (and replenished with all kinds of "rabble" of volunteers), which had no combat experience ..? - How difficult it was to command such an "army" ...
    - And it was generally ... - "The regular Finnish army" ..?
    -Yes, and why was the Red Army to storm the Finnish fortifications "head-on" ..?
    - That would be Hitler would give the order to take the "Maginot Line" in the forehead ...
    -So there would be the entire German army then would have perished, with all its crappy weak T-4 tanks ... -and Hitler would have already come to an end ...
    -Or the commanders of the Red Army in such an illiterate bloody way (at the expense of the lives of their soldiers) decided to get themselves "military glory" ..?
    1. +1
      2 December 2014 08: 31
      Quote: lonovila
      -And how many shells and ammunition did the Finns have ..?

      The reserves still remained from the tsarist army. Something left the Reichswehr. Plus, the Swedes threw very well.
      Quote: lonovila
      -And the Finns did not have anti-tank artillery at all ...

      Was she needed at all? It was possible to penetrate those tanks that were used in the Winter War from a rifle with an armor-piercing bullet. And so they had both anti-tank guns and rifles.

      Quote: lonovila
      -Yes, and what was the "resource" of the Finnish army, hastily recruited from lumberjacks, farmers, resin workers (and replenished with all kinds of "rabble" of volunteers), which had no combat experience ..? - How difficult it was to command such an "army" ...
      - And it was generally ... - "The regular Finnish army" ..?


      And how not to be? 37 thousand peacetime army, in the autumn before the war another 90 thousand reservists called up. I emphasize reservists ... In other words, trained, and not just - "no more than one rifle in one hand" lol They had everything, they do not need to be considered for the Horny.
      1. 0
        2 December 2014 14: 57
        - "Trained" ... - "The times of the Ochakovskys and the conquest of the Crimea" ...
        -These "trained" and tanks have not seen in the eyes ... -Constant forest dwellers ...
        - Have you watched a very old retro film "Behind the Matches" .., based on the work of the Finnish writer Lassil Mayu ..? -That's these "Lipers" (Finnish town) and recruited into the army ... -The Finns simply did not have another army ...
        1. 0
          2 December 2014 16: 35
          And I advise you to watch Finnish war films "Talvisota", "Behind Enemy Lines" and "The Road to Ruukojärvi". There completely different Finns are shown. laughing
          Once again, I repeat, they had everything, do not hold them for pacifists. Or have you read Zubkin? He can write something wrong lol
    2. +2
      2 December 2014 17: 37
      Quote: lonovila
      -And the Finns did not have anti-tank artillery at all ... -Because it was the Finns who began to use the "Molotov cocktail" against tanks ...

      Yah? Not at all? And even "Bofors", which broke through the armor of any serial Soviet tank of that time?

      And about the "Molotov cocktail" - the Finns only gave it a name. A bottle of fire mixture against the tank was used as if not with PMA. In Spain and on Khalkhin Gol - it was already for sure, ours still began to take measures to prevent the flow of the fire mixture.
      Quote: lonovila
      -Yes, and what was the "resource" of the Finnish army, hastily recruited from lumberjacks, farmers, resin workers (and replenished with all kinds of "rabble" of volunteers), which had no combat experience ..? - How difficult it was to command such an "army" ...

      Ahem ... this is what you now described as Red Army-39 — just the quickly formed parts of poorly trained recruits (the transition to universal conscription and the abandonment of the triplets led to an increase in the number of divisions by 2–2,5 times).
      The Finnish army, with its small number, managed to accumulate a personnel reserve. And she was replenished with a membership - volunteers only later went.
      Quote: lonovila
      - That would be Hitler would give the order to take the "Maginot Line" in the forehead ...

      So the Germans and so broke through it three times. Plus, they made similar fortifications in Belgium.
      The Reichswehr and the Wehrmacht were preparing for revenge, as it were, not from Versailles. And they had all the forces and means for a frontal breakthrough of the Maginot Line (including thanks to Austria and Czechoslovakia).
  47. bug
    0
    2 December 2014 17: 18
    Quote: Landwarrior
    Was she needed at all? Those tanks that were used in the Winter War from a rifle with an armor-piercing bullet could be pierced


    Well, it’s you who got excited.

    "The most common light tank T-26 (infantry escort vehicle) had 16 mm frontal armor and 25 mm turrets. Armor protection of other parts of the hull was even weaker. The BT-5 high-speed tanks had 13 mm frontal armor of the hull and turret. The frontal part of the hull of medium tanks T-28 was covered by 30-mm armor, in the turrets - 20 mm.

    Such armor is guaranteed to withstand conventional 7,62 mm and 12,7 mm bullets, as well as 7,62 mm armor-piercing bullets. Armor-piercing bullets of 12,7 mm machine guns pierced 20 mm armor at distances up to 300 meters. German 37-mm anti-tank guns RAK 35/36 from a distance of 100 meters pierced 90-mm armor along the normal (ie at an angle of 50 °), and at an angle of 60 ° - 35-mm armor. "
    "Northern Wars of Russia"

    Yes, the armor was weak, but not enough to pierce the rifle with an armor-piercing bullet. T-26, T-28 and BT-7 in terms of performance were at the level of Wehrmacht tanks. Let the wiser comrades correct me if I am mistaken, but it was in the years 38-39 that the realization came that armor needed to be increased.

    Quote: Landwarrior
    In general, forget these tales about the "kind uncle Manerheim, who did not want to fight

    And what options did the Finns have in that particular political situation (1940)? Friends with the USSR? Sooner or later, the USSR would have swallowed the Finnish state and would have brought the Finnish people all the "delights" of the Soviet system. Great Britain and France? The Finns have already hoped for them, and Poland also hoped for them, the result is known. And Germany offered protection and territorial gains. The choice is obvious. But it was impossible not to choose, kaput. The same Sweden, if it remained completely neutral, and if it did not supply Germany with strategic raw materials, it would share the fate of its Scandinavian neighbors.

    1. +1
      2 December 2014 17: 44
      Quote: error
      Yes, the armor was weak, but not enough to pierce the rifle with an armor-piercing bullet. T-26, T-28 and BT-7 in terms of performance were at the level of Wehrmacht tanks.

      You forgot to add: latest models T-26, T-28 and BT were at the level first models Wehrmacht tanks (and that’s not all - engines and gearboxes were our Achilles heel of the year until 1943).

      But already the "three" issue of 1940, we compared with the T-34 - and the verdict of our experts from Kubinka was unambiguous: the T-34 surpasses the German tank only in the caliber of the gun, which, however, can be quickly corrected by the Germans, who have a 75-mm cannon ...
    2. 0
      2 December 2014 18: 44
      Quote: error
      Well, it’s you who got excited.

      Not at all. On board, quite. Screens on the 26s did not immediately begin to set.

      Quote: error
      The choice is obvious.

      I'm not talking about the fact that they made the wrong choice, I'm talking about "fairy tales".
  48. bug
    0
    2 December 2014 19: 16
    Quote: Alexey RA
    You forgot to add: the latest T-26, T-28 and BT models were at the level of the first Wehrmacht tanks

    Yah!
    The first Wehrmacht tank Grosstraktor and Leihttraktor were at the level of T-28, T-26? Well, we will make a discount on the fact that these are prototypes, training machines.

    Take the serial Pz.I: armament two 7.92 machine guns MG 13, broaching 6-13mm.
    The Drone group in Spain on October 28, 1936, armed with the Pz.I Ausf.A, was completely powerless against the T-26 Republicans. In 1939, the Polish 7TRs were the most dangerous opponents of the unit. For example, on September 5, during a counter strike near the town of Piotrkow-Trybunalski, 7TR tanks of the 2nd Polish tank battalion destroyed five Pz.Is without suffering losses. And units on September 1, 39th in the Wehrmacht were 1445 units, which was 46,4% of the fleet of all Panzerwaffe tanks.

    During the Anschluss of Austria, 30% of another "reliable" Pz.II tank was out of order for technical reasons. Note that there were no battles. The armor of two was easily penetrated by Polish 37mm anti-tank guns. 1-2 September 1st Panzer Division during the breakthrough of the positions of the Volyn cavalry. the brigade lost 8 vehicles from anti-tank fire. Pz.II: armor of 14,5-30mm (and these are D and E models of which only 150 pieces were produced), for the rest of the models, the forehead armor was made of two sheets at an angle of 70 degrees and a thickness of one 14,5, the second 20mm.

    So where are the equal characteristics of the first German tanks when compared with ours? Plus the experience of Spain where our T-26s have proven their superiority.
  49. bug
    0
    2 December 2014 19: 29
    Quote: Alexey RA
    You forgot to add: the latest T-26, T-28 and BT models were at the level of the first Wehrmacht tanks

    Yah!
    The first Wehrmacht tank Grosstraktor and Leihttraktor were at the level of T-28, T-26? Well, we will make a discount on the fact that these are prototypes, training machines.

    Take the serial Pz.I: armament two 7.92 machine guns MG 13, broaching 6-13mm.
    The Drone group in Spain on October 28, 1936, armed with the Pz.I Ausf.A, was completely powerless against the T-26 Republicans. In 1939, the Polish 7TRs were the most dangerous opponents of the unit. For example, on September 5, during a counter strike near the town of Piotrkow-Trybunalski, 7TR tanks of the 2nd Polish tank battalion destroyed five Pz.Is without suffering losses. And units on September 1, 39th in the Wehrmacht were 1445 units, which was 46,4% of the fleet of all Panzerwaffe tanks.

    During the Anschluss of Austria, 30% of another "reliable" Pz.II tank was out of order for technical reasons. Note that there were no battles. The armor of two was easily penetrated by Polish 37mm anti-tank guns. 1-2 September 1st Panzer Division during the breakthrough of the positions of the Volyn cavalry. the brigade lost 8 vehicles from anti-tank fire. Pz.II: armor of 14,5-30mm (and these are D and E models of which only 150 pieces were produced), for the rest of the models, the forehead armor was made of two sheets at an angle of 70 degrees and a thickness of one 14,5, the second 20mm.

    So where are the equal characteristics of the first German tanks when compared with ours? Plus the experience of Spain where our T-26s have proven their superiority.


    Quote: Alexey RA
    But already the "three" issue of 1940, we compared with the T-34 - and the verdict of our experts from Kubinka was unambiguous: the T-34 surpasses the German tank only in the caliber of the gun, which, however, can be quickly corrected by the Germans, who have a 75-mm cannon ...

    Do not read this anymore. Pz.III at the beginning of the war had a 50mm gun only in the Ausf.J version and only 7,5% of the T-34 of the total number destroyed by artillery was lost from the fire of this gun. To penetrate 34-ku this gun could only 300 meters. Only in the year 42, an increase in barrel length to 60 calibers increased the distance of the 50 mm gun’s destruction to 600 meters.

    34-km longer range, better maneuverability, better cross-country ability, better armor. Only in optics and review from the tank does the treshka win.
    1. 0
      3 December 2014 11: 47
      Quote: error
      During the Anschluss of Austria, 30% of another "reliable" Pz.II tank was out of order for technical reasons. Note that there were no battles. The armor of the two was easily penetrated by the Polish 37mm anti-tank guns.

      Well, look at the percentage of failure of our T-26s in 1941. The shelves that left the parks crawled to the concentration areas already with battalions. But the Germans to Poland have already fixed most of the technical problems.
      By booking, our T-26s and BTs made the same mistake. For them, even the Japanese VET was a serious adversary.
      But for our main PTP - 45 mm arr. 37 g. - 30 mm cemented armor was already a big problem. According to the results of the shooting in 1940, it suddenly became clear that our 45-mm armor breaks through only from 150-200 m.
      Quote: error
      So where are the equal characteristics of the first German tanks when compared with ours? Plus the experience of Spain where our T-26s have proven their superiority.

      Speaking of tanks, I meant "two" and beyond. "Kopeyka" is more of a Panzerwaffe training machine.
      By the way, following the results of Spain, Pavlov said that all the tanks of the USSR were out of date - and immediately issued TK to the anti-ballistic reservation tank with a 76-mm divisional gun.
      Quote: error
      Do not read this anymore. Pz.III at the beginning of the war had a 50mm gun only in the Ausf.J version and only 7,5% of the T-34 of the total number destroyed by artillery was lost from the fire of this gun

      "Tanks do not fight with tanks" - see Russian Order 325 of 1942. And the Germans, thanks to their intelligence, the high level of mechanization of their mechanical units and, in part, the infantry (divisional anti-tank units), plus our slowness, managed to meet our tanks with their anti-tank fire.
      A classic example: the 6th Panzerdivision, armed with Czech old 35 (t), fifty "twos" and two dozen "fours", managed to grind our TD with fifty KV to zero.
      However, when the German tanks met with ours, the advantage in the review of the sights gave them the opportunity to work on vulnerable spots, often remaining unnoticed. Yentz had an episode when a pair of "three" repulsed the attack of 5 T-34s, knocking out 3 of them - ours simply did not see them, even when the "three" chased the T-34. The reason is simple: the commander of the T-34 was acting as a gunner and could not simultaneously observe and direct.
      Quote: error
      34-km longer range, better maneuverability, better cross-country ability, better armor.

      In the tables of TK - yes, there was an advantage. But when real cars arrived in Kubinka, it suddenly became clear that the range of the T-34 in fuel was only 165-180 km (and even less in oil).
      Maneuverability of the T-34 ... Gear shifting on the move can only be performed by an experienced mechanical driver - the tank stops at the frontal mechanical drivers. Friction clutches warp and fail for structural reasons. As a result, in battle, a tank can only move in second gear at a speed of no higher than 12-13 km / h. No jerks or harsh maneuvers to escape from the fire of the VET.
      Oh, yes, the "three" was also better than the T-34 in cross-country ability: a slope of 30 degrees. The T-34 was not overpowered.
      Armor ... here the biggest surprise awaited ours. It turned out that 30 mm of German armor did not penetrate 45 mm BBS of all years of production from distances beyond 150-200 mm. But on the way there were tanks with a 30 + 30 "sandwich" and a 50 mm monolith.
      The niprabil problem was corrected only by the end of 1941.
  50. 0
    2 December 2014 22: 40
    Quote: error
    Do not read this anymore. Pz.III at the beginning of the war had a 50mm gun only in the Ausf.J version and only 7,5% of the T-34 of the total number destroyed by artillery was lost from the fire of this gun. To penetrate 34-ku this gun could only 300 meters. Only in the year 42, an increase in barrel length to 60 calibers increased the distance of the 50 mm gun’s destruction to 600 meters.

    Soviet experts compared the German Pz.III with the domestic T-34, and you are comparing the Pz.III AGAINST the T-34 tank. Do you feel the difference? Tanks with tanks practically do not fight. But the better and more durable engine, coupled with excellent transmission, gave the "three-ruble note" noticeable advantages both in top speed and maneuverability. You are here about 7,5% of the 50mm cannon, and how many T-34s they asked banally for breakdowns in the MTO and the chassis are modestly silent. What does this mean? Yes, about the fact that the Panzerwaffe, first of all in 1941, simply "crossed" domestic armored formations, and our roads and anti-tank weapons of the Wehrmacht infantry only finished the job. The Second World War was a war of motors, and only then of armor and guns.
    Quote: error
    34-km longer range, better maneuverability, better cross-country ability, better armor. Only in optics and review from the tank does the treshka win.

    Oh, and you are very cunning. All these advantages were almost impossible to realize due to the low technical reliability of the T-34 until 1943 inclusive.
  51. bug
    0
    3 December 2014 19: 34
    Quote: Alexey RA
    The 6th Panzer Division, armed with old Czech 35(t), fifty "twos" and two dozen "fours", managed to reduce our TD with fifty kv to zero.

    I wonder what the fire is made of? Not 8.8cm an hour? Give me a link that’s interesting to read.

    Quote: Alexey RA
    Armor ... here the biggest surprise awaited ours. It turned out that 30 mm of German armor did not penetrate 45 mm BBS of all years of production from distances beyond 150-200 mm. But on the way there were tanks with a 30 + 30 "sandwich" and a 50 mm monolith.
    The "niprabil" problem was corrected only by the end of 1941


    You are sure? Probably yes, since you write. However:
    "Results of shelling a German T-III tank from a 45mm cannon model 1934 with an armor-piercing shell.

    Distance 50m: front body sheet with screen thickness 60mm (30+30) dents 15mm deep
    800m: turret hatch door on the right 30mm: through hole
    800m rear part of the turret 30mm: through hole
    900m front part of the turret 30mm: through hole, turret jammed
    900m commander's cupola 30+30mm: the paint was torn off, 4 cover bolts flew inside
    900m starboard side of the hull 30mm: through hole
    900m starboard side of the hull 30mm: through hole, crack in the upper part of the turret box, 1m long
    Conclusions: due to its armor-piercing ability with 45mm armor shells, the domestic gun is an effective means of combating all types of German tanks." Report on testing German tanks by firing armor-piercing and fragmentation shells from tank guns. 1942.
    They fired shells of the 1938 model. So, there is no surprise. The Germans on the “three”, even with a 50/60L cannon, at a distance of 500 meters could only penetrate with a sub-caliber projectile, and the usual one was “niprabil”. By the way, can I have a source about the comparison of tanks and the shelling of the “three” in the 40th year?
  52. bug
    0
    3 December 2014 19: 56
    And by the way, in the “Report on the tactical use of German and Soviet tank units in practice,” compiled in 1942 based on the combat experience of the 23rd Panzer Division during Operation Blau, there are the following words: “...6.a) T -34: this tank was superior to all German tanks until the appearance in the spring of 1942 of the German long-barreled tank guns 5 cm KwK L/60 and 7,5 cm KwK L/43, now inferior to them ... "The Germans admitted that their tanks were worse, but you are trying to prove the opposite.
  53. +1
    6 December 2014 21: 51
    “Greater Poland”, “Greater Finland”, “Greater Rumyemya”, “Greater Hungary”, “Greater Japan”... you’ll lose count. A sort of anthill of the “greats” at the feet of Russia.
  54. sw
    sw
    0
    17 May 2015 15: 38
    The article is nonsense. I, while studying at the history department, wrote term papers on Soviet-Finnish relations on the eve of World War II. I studied the topic and know. There were Zhirinovskys in Finland, but they didn’t do anything about the weather. People! don't be fooled by nonsense!
  55. 0
    27 February 2017 16: 42
    Strange article.

    Nothing is said about the political structure of France, nor about its economic condition, nor about the military budget, not to mention the demographic and social stratification of society.

    Even the question of whether F. could hypothetically begin hostilities with the USSR without the latter’s attack has not been considered. (let Mannerheim fall ill and, in a fit of illness, order an attack on Leningrad. Who will carry out his order? Let him make a proposal to start a war in the parliament of F., what is the likelihood of the proposal being accepted?)

    It seems that the author considers F. a classic dictatorship, but this is not at all the case.
  56. 0
    29 October 2017 22: 27
    Quote: Kazanok
    3 million clashed with 180.

    Citizen, share the grass! At the beginning of the SFV, the number of the Red Army on the Kar. Isthmus was approximately equal to the Finnish group, and in terms of infantry it exceeded the EMNIP by only 3 battalions.
  57. 0
    29 June 2020 23: 36
    Yes, the Finns missed such a chance - to live in the USSR.